The Invasion of Ukraine

Discussions about serious topics, for serious people
Post Reply
User avatar
headshot
Dorkwood
Posts: 1107
Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2019 9:40 am

Re: The Invasion of Ukraine

Post by headshot » Fri Nov 11, 2022 7:53 pm

Herainestold wrote:
Fri Nov 11, 2022 3:41 pm
If I was the Russians I'd be shelling the centre of Kherson right now. Why aren't they?
For roughly the same reason that James Corden doesn’t compete in the World Athletics 100m finals.

User avatar
Bird on a Fire
Princess POW
Posts: 9992
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 5:05 pm
Location: Portugal

Re: The Invasion of Ukraine

Post by Bird on a Fire » Fri Nov 11, 2022 9:01 pm

headshot wrote:
Fri Nov 11, 2022 7:53 pm
Herainestold wrote:
Fri Nov 11, 2022 3:41 pm
If I was the Russians I'd be shelling the centre of Kherson right now. Why aren't they?
For roughly the same reason that James Corden doesn’t compete in the World Athletics 100m finals.
Think that's a very unfair comparison - for the Russians!!!
We have the right to a clean, healthy, sustainable environment.

Herainestold
After Pie
Posts: 1913
Joined: Mon Nov 25, 2019 1:23 pm

Re: The Invasion of Ukraine

Post by Herainestold » Sat Nov 12, 2022 4:39 am

Kherson is Russia's Dunkirk.
Could have been a disaster but it wasn't. 30 000 troops and heavy equipment evacuated to fight another day.
With the pro Russian population and the military gone, nothing is stopping Russia from using the Mariupol scenario on Kherson.
Reduce it to rubble.
Masking forever
Putin is a monster, Russian people are not.

User avatar
Grumble
Stummy Beige
Posts: 3771
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:03 pm

Re: The Invasion of Ukraine

Post by Grumble » Sat Nov 12, 2022 6:37 am

Herainestold wrote:
Sat Nov 12, 2022 4:39 am
Kherson is Russia's Dunkirk.
Could have been a disaster but it wasn't. 30 000 troops and heavy equipment evacuated to fight another day.
With the pro Russian population and the military gone, nothing is stopping Russia from using the Mariupol scenario on Kherson.
Reduce it to rubble.
The Russians were attacking Mariupol, they’re running away from Kherson. The Ukrainian army only had small arms and a few people in Mariupol, they’re attacking from Kherson.
A bit churlish

User avatar
bob sterman
Catbabel
Posts: 951
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 10:25 pm
Location: Location Location

Re: The Invasion of Ukraine

Post by bob sterman » Sat Nov 12, 2022 8:01 am

Herainestold wrote:
Sat Nov 12, 2022 4:39 am
Kherson is Russia's Dunkirk.
Could have been a disaster but it wasn't. 30 000 troops and heavy equipment evacuated to fight another day.
With the pro Russian population and the military gone, nothing is stopping Russia from using the Mariupol scenario on Kherson.
Reduce it to rubble.
Image

User avatar
TimW
Catbabel
Posts: 642
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 4:27 pm

Re: The Invasion of Ukraine

Post by TimW » Sat Nov 12, 2022 8:33 am

The Russians have designated Heniches'k as the temporary "capital" of the bit of Kherson Oblast they occupy. It's not a big town, so judging by the map it's been chosen because it's furthest from the front line and they should hang on to it longest.

https://tass.com/world/1535641

User avatar
EACLucifer
Stummy Beige
Posts: 2898
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2019 7:49 am
Location: In Sumerian Haze

Re: The Invasion of Ukraine

Post by EACLucifer » Sun Nov 13, 2022 9:55 pm

Thread by Alexander Vindman excoriating General Milley and his ill-founded pessimism, and general unsuitability for the role.

It's time to get rid of the f.cker and replace him with someone who is competent, but also who understands what his job is and what it isn't. Generals should not be trying to push diplomatic ideas. Nor should they be lobbying the likes of Trump begging for a job. There has to be someone more suitable, time to find them, and get rid of Milley.

User avatar
Woodchopper
Light of Blast
Posts: 5992
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2019 9:05 am

Re: The Invasion of Ukraine

Post by Woodchopper » Mon Nov 14, 2022 6:07 am

On the suggestions that Ukraine look for a deal. It appears that Miley may have been speaking for others in the Biden administration.
Senior U.S. officials have begun nudging Kyiv to start thinking about peace talks in the event winter stalls its momentum, following Ukraine’s recapture of Kherson in one of its most stunning triumphs of the war.

The imminent onset of winter—coupled with fears of inflation spurred by mounting energy and food prices, the billions of dollars of weaponry already pumped into Ukraine, and the tens of thousands of casualties on both sides—has prompted talk in Washington of a potential inflection point in the war, now in its ninth month.

The U.S. and its allies are pledging to continue supporting Ukraine, but top officials in Washington are beginning to wonder aloud how much more territory can be won by either side, and at what cost. Some European officials, meanwhile, are more bullish on Ukraine’s chances.

[…]

The prospect that Ukraine won’t make major battlefield gains in the weeks ahead has led the U.S. and some European officials to ask when public pressure will emerge to demand a settlement.

“We are saying to the Ukrainians that it is up to them to decide when to do it,” said a Western European official, referring to the potential for talks. “But it might be a good idea to do it sooner.”

U.S. officials, for their part, don’t think now is the right time, but more of them believe the coming weeks and months provide an opportunity to talk about talks.

The U.S. and some of its allies are concerned that their stockpiles of weaponry, including some ammunition, are being depleted at an unsustainable rate. U.S. military support for Ukraine this year, now nearing $19 billion, has far outstripped European assistance.

“We are seeing real, practical problems of making military progress, we are seeing shortages of munitions,” said another Western official.

The same day that Gen. Milley spoke of an opportunity for talks, President Biden too suggested the time could soon be right.

[…]

Washington has signaled to Ukraine that at a minimum Kyiv needs to appear open to a negotiated solution. Mr. Biden’s national security adviser, Jake Sullivan, conveyed that message to President Volodymyr Zelensky and his lieutenants in Kyiv on Nov. 4, suggesting that Kyiv would gain leverage by showing openness to negotiations, according to people familiar with the discussions.

Two European diplomats briefed on the discussions said Mr. Sullivan recommended that Mr. Zelensky’s team start thinking about its realistic demands and priorities for negotiations, including a reconsideration of its stated aim for Ukraine to regain Crimea, which was annexed in 2014.

[…]

Administration officials, including Mr. Sullivan, continue to state in public that Washington won’t press Kyiv on a diplomatic course, a practice that is perplexing the U.S.’s North Atlantic Treaty Organization allies. State Department officials briefed some European partners in Washington last week to allay concerns about a shift in approach, according to two senior European officials.

“It is our job to put them in the best position on the battlefield so that when and if there is an opportunity for diplomacy, they’re in the best position at the bargaining table,” Mr. Sullivan said Thursday. “The United States is not pressuring Ukraine. We’re not insisting on things with Ukraine.”

U.S. Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen meanwhile said some sanctions on Russia could remain in place even after any eventual peace agreement with Ukraine, raising the prospect of a long-term U.S. effort to squeeze Russia’s economy. Ms. Yellen said in an interview in Indonesia, where she is attending a gathering of G-20 leaders, that any eventual peace agreement would involve a review of the penalties the U.S. and its allies have imposed on Russia’s economy.

[…]

With Ukrainian troops winning on the ground, Mr. Zelensky and his top aides have warned publicly that pursuing peace talks with Russian President Vladimir Putin now would amount to a needless surrender. Some of the U.S.’s European allies have said Ukraine’s advances leave Kyiv with little reason to submit to Mr. Putin’s demands.

[…]

They believe Ukraine can retake more territory if Western arms keep flowing, strengthening its position in eventual negotiations. Washington’s new pledge of another $400 million in security assistance reinforced the Europeans’ confidence in U.S. support for Ukraine’s military.

“We as the West, we must be extremely careful not to press Ukraine on anything because we know that this war was started by Russia and this war can be ended in a minute if Russia simply decides to end it,” said Latvian Defense Minister Artis Pabriks.

Officials in some European countries, particularly in the east and north, have said that publicly pressing for talks could hurt Ukraine’s efforts and play to Russia’s aims of dividing the alliance.

“We need to talk about the cost of peace,” one northern European official said. If the war ends now, “The message the Ukrainians would get is that their fight was meaningless. The message Russia would get is that this is time to refit and to rebuild economically. No one believes [Russia] will stop until they achieve their strategic objective.”

[…]

Yet European and U.S. officials have said they see little sign that the Kremlin is interested in serious talks. At a Group of Seven meeting earlier this month, foreign ministers agreed that it was up to Ukraine to decide when the military and political conditions were right to seek a cease-fire and pursue negotiations, said participants at the meeting. The ministers said in a statement afterward that the Kremlin’s call for peace talks wasn’t credible as Mr. Putin continues to escalate the war.

[…]

Critical to the differences between allies over how urgently diplomacy should be pursued are varying assessments of the prospect of Ukraine gaining more ground in the winter months ahead.

[…]

Some NATO allies believe that Ukraine will struggle to make major breakthroughs, as it attacks areas that are more urbanized and closer to Russia, and where Russian forces have been present longer and have had time to fortify their defenses. Meanwhile, Russia has been pounding Ukraine’s civilian infrastructure in recent weeks, imposing blackouts and power and water shortages on millions of Ukrainians.

Others, more confident of Ukraine’s chances, don’t believe the fighting will stall. The country’s growing arsenal of air defense systems has become more efficient at intercepting missiles and drones.

A Western diplomat said there was concern among some European partners that Washington was coaxing Ukraine toward talks before its troops could make further gains.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/as-ukraine ... 1668345883

The most important issue raised in the article is that of depleted munitions stocks and limited production capacity to replace them. It’s not just about the number of tanks but the number of missiles etc.

We’ve discussed the shortages before and the US and European supporters of Ukraine can’t keep providing equipment at similar levels indefinitely.

User avatar
Woodchopper
Light of Blast
Posts: 5992
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2019 9:05 am

Re: The Invasion of Ukraine

Post by Woodchopper » Mon Nov 14, 2022 7:43 am

Supply shortages are not new. As far as I remember during the Cold War NATO members planned on having ammunition stocks sufficient for 30 days of fighting against the Warsaw Pact. In practice several European members had much less than that.

That’s one reason why we were so worried about a nuclear war. If WW3 had started within a month NATO would have been faced with a choice between nuclear war or capitulation. Though it was assumed that nuclear weapons would have been used much earlier anyway.

User avatar
Woodchopper
Light of Blast
Posts: 5992
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2019 9:05 am

Re: The Invasion of Ukraine

Post by Woodchopper » Mon Nov 14, 2022 8:03 am

Before people start ripping into the US they should consider:

a) US stocks of GMLRS missiles, Javelins, Stingers and other critical weapons.
b) Monthly production, and by how much that could feasibly be increased even with unlimited budgets.
c) Stocks needed to fight other possible wars (eg North Korea or China over Taiwan).

plodder
Stummy Beige
Posts: 2981
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:50 pm

Re: The Invasion of Ukraine

Post by plodder » Mon Nov 14, 2022 12:01 pm

Woodchopper wrote:
Mon Nov 14, 2022 8:03 am
Before people start ripping into the US they should consider:

a) US stocks of GMLRS missiles, Javelins, Stingers and other critical weapons.
b) Monthly production, and by how much that could feasibly be increased even with unlimited budgets.
c) Stocks needed to fight other possible wars (eg North Korea or China over Taiwan).
Sure. It's also interesting that they're choosing now to go more public about this. We've just had the mid terms, for sure, but also I'd imagine US analysts are wargaming the hell out of the relative positions and they're clearly thinking any further rapid advances for Ukraine will be difficult. So an interesting decision for Ukraine. Do they listen to their allies or do they roll the dice and press ahead as quickly as possible to prove them wrong?

Imrael
Fuzzable
Posts: 290
Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2019 5:59 am

Re: The Invasion of Ukraine

Post by Imrael » Mon Nov 14, 2022 12:15 pm

I think one pressure on Ukraine is to generate successes on a fairly regular basis to keep world opinion and support on-side. No idea if its made an actual difference to their military ops though.

User avatar
EACLucifer
Stummy Beige
Posts: 2898
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2019 7:49 am
Location: In Sumerian Haze

Re: The Invasion of Ukraine

Post by EACLucifer » Mon Nov 14, 2022 12:50 pm

plodder wrote:
Mon Nov 14, 2022 12:01 pm
Woodchopper wrote:
Mon Nov 14, 2022 8:03 am
Before people start ripping into the US they should consider:

a) US stocks of GMLRS missiles, Javelins, Stingers and other critical weapons.
b) Monthly production, and by how much that could feasibly be increased even with unlimited budgets.
c) Stocks needed to fight other possible wars (eg North Korea or China over Taiwan).
Sure. It's also interesting that they're choosing now to go more public about this. We've just had the mid terms, for sure, but also I'd imagine US analysts are wargaming the hell out of the relative positions and they're clearly thinking any further rapid advances for Ukraine will be difficult. So an interesting decision for Ukraine. Do they listen to their allies or do they roll the dice and press ahead as quickly as possible to prove them wrong?
1) They were claiming that before Kherson. And before Kharkiv. They were wrong.

2) This discussion was started by me posting criticism of General Milley. He was the one that was pushing the idea that Ukraine's defence would only last a few days back in February.

3) Ukraine is well placed to keep advancing. Russia's supply situation is pretty f.cked west of the Donbas; the Kerch Straits bridge is effectively out of action for rail and very limited for road, and Russia relies on rail, not just road, for logistics. Meanwhile there isn't a rail link to occupied southern Ukraine that doesn't either go via Crimea, or within a couple of miles at the front, making it unusable. That's at Pavlivka, which is why Russia's made a desparate move there, throwing in troops for an attack that has not succeeded. Ukraine has the initiative, they have better access to night vision - quite an important thing in winter - and winter equipment, with very significant quanitities of cold weather equipment arriving from western countries. Meanwhile, Russia is unable to issue decent cold weather gear. In addition, a lighter, more agile force consisting of lighter vehicles and infantry is better able to adapt to the conditions.

This doesn't mean those advances will happen on a predictable timetable. The Kharkiv offensive was a surprise to everyone, and things were looking very static before the Russians f.cked off from Kherson. But there'll be more movement of the front at some point. When the situation is right.

And the pessemists have been wrong at every turn.

Ukraine won't be able to stop the Russian invasion or even slow it down much...ah well, nevertheless
Ukraine can ambush convoys and slow the Russians down, but they won't be able to stop the Russians taking Kyiv in the end...ah well, nevertheless
Ukraine can stall the Russians, but it will be very different when they try to retake territory...ah well, nevertheless
It's different in the Donbas! Ukraine has no answer to the Russian artillery advantage! They'll be encircled! They'll be overrun!...ah well, nevertheless
The Russian operations in the north were a disaster, so of course Ukraine was able to force them to withdraw, but the retaking territory is very different elsewhere...ah well, nevertheless
But Kharkiv oblast was lightly defended and Ukraine just exploited a favourable situation, it will be different where there's major forces opposing...ah well, nevertheless

So what'll it be now, Kherson was just because of the bridges? Why should we be listening to a camp that gets it so wrong so consistently, and still refuses to learn. That still acts as if Russia's armed forces are what their propaganda said they were, that just will not allow Ukraine's advantage in numbers of fighting soldiers and quite likely tanks at this point to affect their thinking because they are so attached to the idea of the Unstoppable Russian Steamrollertm

And we can add to that people that look at supply shortages in the west and aren't also thinking about supply shortages for Russia. Would they be scrounging up arms from Iran and North Korea if their own stocks and industries could supply them properly?

Milley was wrong on this. He f.cked it up, just like he f.cked it up in Afghanistan. So it's time for a new CJCS.

User avatar
EACLucifer
Stummy Beige
Posts: 2898
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2019 7:49 am
Location: In Sumerian Haze

Re: The Invasion of Ukraine

Post by EACLucifer » Mon Nov 14, 2022 1:00 pm

Woodchopper wrote:
Mon Nov 14, 2022 8:03 am
Before people start ripping into the US they should consider:

a) US stocks of GMLRS missiles, Javelins, Stingers and other critical weapons.
b) Monthly production, and by how much that could feasibly be increased even with unlimited budgets.
c) Stocks needed to fight other possible wars (eg North Korea or China over Taiwan).
Nah, going to rip into the US here.

1) This invasion was looking likely a year ago, and is almost nine months old. That's time to put out orders for increased supplies.

2) Other suppliers of ammunition are available. South Korean industry is very capable, and the US is now sourcing shells there. Likewise European industry is providing shells.

3) If the US is serious about defending Taiwan, they should look at timescales. The Taiwan Straits are too formiddable an obstacle for the fascists from Beijing to cross without substantial preparation. Substantial visible preparation. Meanwhile, if 2023 goes like 2022, Russia will be defeated and their military largely broken. The US will be able to leave the security of Europe in European hands for the first time since the Second World War. That frees them up for their pivot to the Pacific. In addition, it would be mad to hold weapons back in American arsenals to protect Taiwan. The situation would be so different if Taiwan were to be invaded that it is quite possible - probable - that it will become nearly impossible to resupply Taiwan once it is underway.

4) The very worst thing America can do in a situation like this is to suggest they can't carry on supplying aid. The message to Russia needs to be "You're exhausted? We can keep doing this indefinitely". It is vital to project strength so as to influence negotiations. And indeed if the priority is Taiwan, then setting a clear example of what happens to fascists that invade their neighbours due to imperialism and revanchism is important - and important for a number of other countries that have the misfortune to live near Red China.

5) Any deal that sees any part of Crimea remaining with Russia rewards Putin, and helps keep him in power. It encourages Russia to try again in future. That means there is no guarantee that Ukraine is safe, save that they manage to create and maintain a formiddable armed forces. That means the US is tied down for much longer. And remember, what is the point of a peace treaty with Putin? He'll break it, just as Russia broke the Minsk agreements, the Budapest Memorandum, and so on.

User avatar
Woodchopper
Light of Blast
Posts: 5992
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2019 9:05 am

Re: The Invasion of Ukraine

Post by Woodchopper » Mon Nov 14, 2022 1:31 pm

EACLucifer wrote:
Mon Nov 14, 2022 12:50 pm

2) This discussion was started by me posting criticism of General Milley. He was the one that was pushing the idea that Ukraine's defence would only last a few days back in February.
I'm not sure he did that.

The only source I can find for Milley stating that Kyiv would fall within days is this 5 February article published by Fox News. The claim is repeated elsewhere, including by Russian propaganda outlet RT, but that Fox article appears to be where it originated. The Fox article was based upon unnamed 'congressional sources' at briefing and Milley wasn't quoted. That Fox News article doesn't appear to be a very reliable source.

Even if 72 hours were mentioned we don't know the context. For example, it might have been used as a warning of what could happen if Ukraine wasn't given US aid, something which seems to be hinted in the Fox article. (Such an assertion may have been incorrect, but perhaps judged to be a political necessity needed to send the equipment).

Happy if you can provide a more reliable source.

User avatar
Woodchopper
Light of Blast
Posts: 5992
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2019 9:05 am

Re: The Invasion of Ukraine

Post by Woodchopper » Mon Nov 14, 2022 2:21 pm

Woodchopper wrote:
Mon Nov 14, 2022 1:31 pm
EACLucifer wrote:
Mon Nov 14, 2022 12:50 pm

2) This discussion was started by me posting criticism of General Milley. He was the one that was pushing the idea that Ukraine's defence would only last a few days back in February.
I'm not sure he did that.

The only source I can find for Milley stating that Kyiv would fall within days is this 5 February article published by Fox News. The claim is repeated elsewhere, including by Russian propaganda outlet RT, but that Fox article appears to be where it originated. The Fox article was based upon unnamed 'congressional sources' at briefing and Milley wasn't quoted. That Fox News article doesn't appear to be a very reliable source.

Even if 72 hours were mentioned we don't know the context. For example, it might have been used as a warning of what could happen if Ukraine wasn't given US aid, something which seems to be hinted in the Fox article. (Such an assertion may have been incorrect, but perhaps judged to be a political necessity needed to send the equipment).

Happy if you can provide a more reliable source.
I looked that up because a belief that Kyiv would fall in days seems to be at odds with what the US was doing at he time, which was supplying Ukraine with arms needed to defend its self, and encouraging others to do so. If it was assumed that the war would be over in three days then there wouldn't have been any point sending all the equipment they did send.

User avatar
EACLucifer
Stummy Beige
Posts: 2898
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2019 7:49 am
Location: In Sumerian Haze

Re: The Invasion of Ukraine

Post by EACLucifer » Mon Nov 14, 2022 2:34 pm

Woodchopper wrote:
Mon Nov 14, 2022 1:31 pm
EACLucifer wrote:
Mon Nov 14, 2022 12:50 pm

2) This discussion was started by me posting criticism of General Milley. He was the one that was pushing the idea that Ukraine's defence would only last a few days back in February.
I'm not sure he did that.

The only source I can find for Milley stating that Kyiv would fall within days is this 5 February article published by Fox News. The claim is repeated elsewhere, including by Russian propaganda outlet RT, but that Fox article appears to be where it originated. The Fox article was based upon unnamed 'congressional sources' at briefing and Milley wasn't quoted. That Fox News article doesn't appear to be a very reliable source.

Even if 72 hours were mentioned we don't know the context. For example, it might have been used as a warning of what could happen if Ukraine wasn't given US aid, something which seems to be hinted in the Fox article. (Such an assertion may have been incorrect, but perhaps judged to be a political necessity needed to send the equipment).

Happy if you can provide a more reliable source.
Days was my phrasing, Vindman's thread says "quickly defeated", and there's a lot of discussion of US assessments floating around. Short version is they underestimated Ukraine then.

And this is supported by what we can infer from military aid. The US wouldn't even send Stingers. They sent more Javelins, but I'm confident they wouldn't have done so if they'd not already been supplying them. That tells us that they did not feel more military aid was either unnecessary, or wouldn't make a difference. We can rule out the former as they were making it very clear they knew an invasion was coming, which leaves us with the latter interpretation; the US was so stingy with military aid because they didn't expect it to make a difference.

And in so doing they failed in deterrence, and in preparation. If they'd sent M777s and M142s back in late 2021, when the invasion was clearly planned, it might have put the Russians off entirely, and had it failed to do that, it would have altered the course of the war and saved Ukrainian lives. Reverting to a defeatist posture now carries the same penalties - Russia will conclude they can get away with more, and thus if negotiations do happen, they will make fewer concessions, and in the meantime Ukrainians will die because aid was withheld.

And I know you've been mentioning Stinger supplies and Javelin supplies and GMLRS supplies. But one reason these are impacted is because they are doing too much work because the west has not supplied enough types of system. How many M31s were expended against the Antonivsky bridge to make it impassable? Clearly it was a lot, because they were taking a weapon designed to hit troop concentrations and similar positions and trying to use it to demolish a structure. It was like trying to cut a tree down with a sabre. And there's ways round the GMLRS shortage. Keeping M30/31 production going even as the US moves to ER-GMLRS is an obvious one, and allowing some depletion of their own M30/31 stocks in anticipation of ER-GMLRS another. Then there's GL-SDB. It's not in production yet, but it takes a weapon that is in stock but useless (The M26) and one that's in stock and produced in quantity and combines them, with the adaptors quite likely to be simple(the US doesn't produce enough ground launched weapons because it is too reliant on air-dominance, but the Small Diameter Bomb part of the GL-SDB is available in quantity). Likewise, just sending Small Diameter Bombs to mount on Ukraine's aircraft would help, or better yet, aircraft, which the US is not short of. A shortage of Javelins isn't great, but the Javelin was so key in Feb/Mar because it is human portable. Now, with the Ukrainians operating in motor/mechanised groupings, the Humvee mounted TOW is a good option, and there's various ways to launch Hellfires from the ground.

Or to keep it brief, because I could go on for several pages about the details, US supply shortages are in part a consequence of limiting aid, because it puts artificial strain on the few types of system that are sent. The US absolutely can out-manufacture Russia, especially as it isn't the US alone - it's the US and Europe, with the option of sourcing arms from further afield, for example South Korea.

User avatar
EACLucifer
Stummy Beige
Posts: 2898
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2019 7:49 am
Location: In Sumerian Haze

Re: The Invasion of Ukraine

Post by EACLucifer » Mon Nov 14, 2022 2:44 pm

Woodchopper wrote:
Mon Nov 14, 2022 2:21 pm
supplying Ukraine with arms needed to defend its self, and encouraging others to do so.
But they were sending a tiny fraction of what was needed, and no heavy arms at all. It's easy to look at what has been sent now and think it was true then, but it wasn't.

Latvia and Estonia had sent Stingers before the escalation occurred. The US had not, and I can't find references to them sending them before the second week of March, which was after the initial "wait, the Russians...aren't winning?" shock had processed.

The first heavy arms - M777s and M113s and so on - weren't supplied until after the Ukrainians had defeated the attacks on Kyiv and Chernihiv and Sumy and driven the Russians back from Kharkiv. While Javelins and N-LAWs and so on were important here, this feat was mostly achieved with arms Ukraine already had, mostly old Soviet stuff.

The US also reportedly offered to evacuate Zelenskyy from Kyiv. Everything points to them expecting Ukrainian forces in the east to be defeated and the need to conduct an insurgency or maintain government continuity from the west of the country or in exile.

User avatar
EACLucifer
Stummy Beige
Posts: 2898
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2019 7:49 am
Location: In Sumerian Haze

Re: The Invasion of Ukraine

Post by EACLucifer » Tue Nov 15, 2022 1:56 pm

Russia's launching another wave of missile attacks on civilian targets. Can't win on the battlefield, so they deliberately target civilians.

Time to equip Ukraine with what they need to take the launching sites and production facilities for these missiles out of action.

User avatar
Woodchopper
Light of Blast
Posts: 5992
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2019 9:05 am

Re: The Invasion of Ukraine

Post by Woodchopper » Tue Nov 15, 2022 6:34 pm

Two stray rockets fell in the town of Przewodów in Poland on the border with Ukraine. They hit the grain dryers. Two people died. The police, the prosecutor's office and the army are on site
https://twitter.com/faytuks/status/1592 ... 3mECldG9Jg

User avatar
EACLucifer
Stummy Beige
Posts: 2898
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2019 7:49 am
Location: In Sumerian Haze

Re: The Invasion of Ukraine

Post by EACLucifer » Tue Nov 15, 2022 6:54 pm

Woodchopper wrote:
Tue Nov 15, 2022 6:34 pm
Two stray rockets fell in the town of Przewodów in Poland on the border with Ukraine. They hit the grain dryers. Two people died. The police, the prosecutor's office and the army are on site
https://twitter.com/faytuks/status/1592 ... 3mECldG9Jg
Image

User avatar
EACLucifer
Stummy Beige
Posts: 2898
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2019 7:49 am
Location: In Sumerian Haze

Re: The Invasion of Ukraine

Post by EACLucifer » Tue Nov 15, 2022 7:13 pm

Poland's called an emergency meeting of their national security council. More news will presumably follow.

My thoughts at the moment are that a response is required. That response should meet three criteria;

It should be measured and limited, a one off response to a one off incident, to be repeated if necessary on a larger scale if there are further violations of NATO territory.

Any kinetic response should be confined solely to legitimate military targets.

The response should be very disproportionate, to communicate in the clearest possible terms that such behaviour will never be tolerated from Russia, and pour encourager les autres

User avatar
jimbob
Light of Blast
Posts: 4434
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 4:04 pm
Location: High Peak/Manchester

Re: The Invasion of Ukraine

Post by jimbob » Tue Nov 15, 2022 7:16 pm

AP news story on it

https://apnews.com/article/russia-ukrai ... 1b52ff9d52
KYIV, Ukraine (AP) — A senior U.S. intelligence official says Russian missiles crossed into NATO member Poland, killing two people.

Polish government spokesman Piotr Mueller did not immediately confirm the information, but said top leaders were holding an emergency meeting due to a “crisis situation.”

Polish media reported that two people died Tuesday afternoon after a projectile struck an area where grain was drying in Przewodów, a Polish village near the border with Ukraine.
Describes "missiles" so it looks like Russia trying for implausible deniability
Have you considered stupidity as an explanation

User avatar
EACLucifer
Stummy Beige
Posts: 2898
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2019 7:49 am
Location: In Sumerian Haze

Re: The Invasion of Ukraine

Post by EACLucifer » Tue Nov 15, 2022 7:25 pm

Aside from hitting Poland (which, incidentally, is more likely to see an Article 4 response than an Article 5 one), Russia hit civilian targets across Ukraine, and has been deliberately targetting energy infrastructure again as part of a coordinated plan to make areas uninhabitable in winter and drive Ukrainians into seeking refugee status, which they think will destabilise Europe.

The Dutch foreign minister was forced to rush to a bomb shelter in Kyiv.

User avatar
EACLucifer
Stummy Beige
Posts: 2898
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2019 7:49 am
Location: In Sumerian Haze

Re: The Invasion of Ukraine

Post by EACLucifer » Tue Nov 15, 2022 7:26 pm

jimbob wrote:
Tue Nov 15, 2022 7:16 pm
AP news story on it

https://apnews.com/article/russia-ukrai ... 1b52ff9d52
KYIV, Ukraine (AP) — A senior U.S. intelligence official says Russian missiles crossed into NATO member Poland, killing two people.

Polish government spokesman Piotr Mueller did not immediately confirm the information, but said top leaders were holding an emergency meeting due to a “crisis situation.”

Polish media reported that two people died Tuesday afternoon after a projectile struck an area where grain was drying in Przewodów, a Polish village near the border with Ukraine.
Describes "missiles" so it looks like Russia trying for implausible deniability
They hit right near the border, so it's most likely they missed what they were aiming at. However, hitting civilians in one country because you missed when aiming at civilians in another country isn't much of an excuse.

Post Reply