Scrutable

Trollolololololo

Some idiot gave this oaf a copy of the invasion map. It includes an arrow going into Moldova (Transnistria) from the Odessa area.

Woodchopper wrote: Wed Mar 02, 2022 3:39 am

Herainestold wrote: Wed Mar 02, 2022 2:31 am The original purpose of Nato is to oppose Russia.That is what it was designed to do. Is it any wonder the Russians feel threatened by it?

It’s original purpose was to oppose the Warsaw Pact military alliance which was led by the Soviet Union.

Not quite. NATO was founded in 1949, Warsaw Pact in 1955. So for the first 6 years it was about "the Soviets and their post-WW2 occupied territories", not that any names have ever been mentioned.

It's been at least 48 hours since we first heard of the 20/40/60km long convoy of doom trundlìng down the road towards Kyiv with the leading units only 30km away. What's happened to it? Did it split up, divert, get stuck, melt, turn back, or did it never exist?

sTeamTraen wrote: Wed Mar 02, 2022 9:20 am

Woodchopper wrote: Wed Mar 02, 2022 3:39 am

Herainestold wrote: Wed Mar 02, 2022 2:31 am The original purpose of Nato is to oppose Russia.That is what it was designed to do. Is it any wonder the Russians feel threatened by it?

It’s original purpose was to oppose the Warsaw Pact military alliance which was led by the Soviet Union.

Not quite. NATO was founded in 1949, Warsaw Pact in 1955. So for the first 6 years it was about "the Soviets and their post-WW2 occupied territories", not that any names have ever been mentioned.

You are of course correct.

sTeamTraen wrote: Wed Mar 02, 2022 9:23 am It's been at least 48 hours since we first heard of the 20/40/60km long convoy of doom trundlìng down the road towards Kyiv with the leading units only 30km away. What's happened to it? Did it split up, divert, get stuck, melt, turn back, or did it never exist?

Apparently it’s turned into an enormous traffic jam: https://www.npr.org/2022/03/01/10837337 ... icial-says

We know that Russian vehicles are running out of fuel. With freezing temperatures even stationary vehicles will run their engines at least part of the time and keep using more fuel. So it seems plausible that if Russia can’t improve its logistics the column is going to move slowly.

sTeamTraen wrote: Wed Mar 02, 2022 9:23 am It's been at least 48 hours since we first heard of the 20/40/60km long convoy of doom trundlìng down the road towards Kyiv with the leading units only 30km away. What's happened to it? Did it split up, divert, get stuck, melt, turn back, or did it never exist?

As far as anyone can tell it's stuck, possibly out of fuel, potentially even running out of food by now. The main part of it doesn't seem to have moved much.

Grumble wrote: Sun Feb 27, 2022 8:58 pmThere’s a Ukrainian Club in Stockport. I might see if they’re organising anything.

A Polish friend is collecting stuff to be taken to Poland and has details of similar operations around the north west, so anyone get in touch if you’d like details.

nekomatic wrote: Wed Mar 02, 2022 10:51 am

Grumble wrote: Sun Feb 27, 2022 8:58 pmThere’s a Ukrainian Club in Stockport. I might see if they’re organising anything.

A Polish friend is collecting stuff to be taken to Poland and has details of similar operations around the north west, so anyone get in touch if you’d like details.

I went to the Ukrainian club facebook page and they had a donation link, so I went there and chucked in a few quid. My work also has a donation matching thing, so I might do that too.

sTeamTraen wrote: Wed Mar 02, 2022 9:23 am It's been at least 48 hours since we first heard of the 20/40/60km long convoy of doom trundlìng down the road towards Kyiv with the leading units only 30km away. What's happened to it? Did it split up, divert, get stuck, melt, turn back, or did it never exist?

An alternative explanation voiced on the news was that Russian forces are regrouping. Seems unlikely to me. They're already in a pretty big group.

I think as others have said they've gone beyond their logistics and are stuck.

Or maybe they've got all the food, fuel and ammo they need, and are thinking perhaps that advancing into Kyiv (with snipers and Javelins and a million people who hate you) is the worst idea since some Trojans decided to adopt a big wooden horse.

TopBadger wrote: Wed Mar 02, 2022 11:43 am

sTeamTraen wrote: Wed Mar 02, 2022 9:23 am It's been at least 48 hours since we first heard of the 20/40/60km long convoy of doom trundlìng down the road towards Kyiv with the leading units only 30km away. What's happened to it? Did it split up, divert, get stuck, melt, turn back, or did it never exist?

An alternative explanation voiced on the news was that Russian forces are regrouping. Seems unlikely to me. They're already in a pretty big group.

I think as others have said they've gone beyond their logistics and are stuck.

Or maybe they've got all the food, fuel and ammo they need, and are thinking perhaps that advancing into Kyiv (with snipers and Javelins and a million people who hate you) is the worst idea since some Trojans decided to adopt a big wooden horse.

Maybe just a load of road blocks, dismantled bridges, blocked tunnels - that's what I'd do.

My background knowledge for this: Spoiler:

Hasn't Russia got loads of aeroplanes? I'm sure I remember stuff about aeroplanes when they were destroying Syria.

Why are we still watching tanks trundle glacially across the landscape like it's the 1930s?

Bird on a Fire wrote: Wed Mar 02, 2022 11:58 am Hasn't Russia got loads of aeroplanes? I'm sure I remember stuff about aeroplanes when they were destroying Syria.

Why are we still watching tanks trundle glacially across the landscape like it's the 1930s?

That's a very good question. I had assumed that its air advantage would be decisive from day one.

Some informed speculation can be found here: https://rusi.org/explore-our-research/p ... -air-force and here https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/wh ... 022-03-01/

Bird on a Fire wrote: Wed Mar 02, 2022 11:58 am Hasn't Russia got loads of aeroplanes? I'm sure I remember stuff about aeroplanes when they were destroying Syria.

Why are we still watching tanks trundle glacially across the landscape like it's the 1930s?

Perhaps he's simply keeping airpower "in his pocket" as a future escalation measure.

Perhaps Putin has calculated that if he brings airpower to bear that will increase sanctions and also his risk of NATO countries deciding to impose a no-fly zone, which would be a slap in the face, and bring more NATO armaments to bear in the area of Ukraine generally (because NATO will need ground units to defend the air defense), which then increases the risk of dragging NATO in.

It is odd though - usually first thing you do in an invasion is look to control the skies.

Bird on a Fire wrote: Wed Mar 02, 2022 11:58 am Hasn't Russia got loads of aeroplanes? I'm sure I remember stuff about aeroplanes when they were destroying Syria.

Why are we still watching tanks trundle glacially across the landscape like it's the 1930s?

Well, Russia didn't want to occupy Syria & thus didn't care how many Syrians it killed. It wants Ukraine to come back into the arms of the fatherland and if you start off by bombing people, that tends not to engender positive feelings towards you.
It all points to the theory that Russia really thought they would be welcomed as liberators

tom p wrote: Wed Mar 02, 2022 1:35 pm

Bird on a Fire wrote: Wed Mar 02, 2022 11:58 am Hasn't Russia got loads of aeroplanes? I'm sure I remember stuff about aeroplanes when they were destroying Syria.

Why are we still watching tanks trundle glacially across the landscape like it's the 1930s?

Well, Russia didn't want to occupy Syria & thus didn't care how many Syrians it killed. It wants Ukraine to come back into the arms of the fatherland and if you start off by bombing people, that tends not to engender positive feelings towards you.
It all points to the theory that Russia really thought they would be welcomed as liberators

I'm sure there's someone on here who would argue it's because Russian forces aren't invading at all. It's the Ukrainians shelling themselves. False flag innit.

TimW wrote: Wed Mar 02, 2022 8:52 am Some idiot gave this oaf a copy of the invasion map. It includes an arrow going into Moldova (Transnistria) from the Odessa area.


Secret Map.jpg

There have been Russian troops peacekeeping in Transnistria, years after the Moldovans expected them to f.ck off, though I think the breakaway Transnistrians are happier about it.

Opti wrote: Wed Mar 02, 2022 1:51 pm

tom p wrote: Wed Mar 02, 2022 1:35 pm

Bird on a Fire wrote: Wed Mar 02, 2022 11:58 am Hasn't Russia got loads of aeroplanes? I'm sure I remember stuff about aeroplanes when they were destroying Syria.

Why are we still watching tanks trundle glacially across the landscape like it's the 1930s?

Well, Russia didn't want to occupy Syria & thus didn't care how many Syrians it killed. It wants Ukraine to come back into the arms of the fatherland and if you start off by bombing people, that tends not to engender positive feelings towards you.
It all points to the theory that Russia really thought they would be welcomed as liberators

I'm sure there's someone on here who would argue it's because Russian forces aren't invading at all. It's the Ukrainians shelling themselves. False flag innit.

Tru dat

Two very interesting points in the RUSI article link though... which I'll summarize as:

a) Russian Airforce doesn't have enough precision munitions to warrant risking a pilot & plane over the use of artillery and rockets
b) Russian Airforce doesn't trust their own air defenses to not knock them out of the skies due to lack of co-ordination.

They have had some logistic problems (though much exaggerated, I fear) and they are biding their time. When the time comes they will destroy Kiev as they destroyed Grozny. One of Europe's major cities is about to be flattened.

At this point, the best result would be for Ukraine to surrender and avoid horrendous civilian casualties.

Herainestold wrote: Wed Mar 02, 2022 2:45 pm They have had some logistic problems (though much exaggerated, I fear) and they are biding their time. When the time comes they will destroy Kiev as they destroyed Grozny. One of Europe's major cities is about to be flattened.

At this point, the best result would be for Ukraine to surrender and avoid horrendous civilian casualties.

Should Moldova, Poland, Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia surrender now as well to save time? Perhaps UK ought to just turn the keys over to Putin as well just in case. Lets just make him world leader - it’s the only way to stop potential casualties.

Herainestold wrote: Wed Mar 02, 2022 2:45 pm They have had some logistic problems (though much exaggerated, I fear) and they are biding their time. When the time comes they will destroy Kiev as they destroyed Grozny. One of Europe's major cities is about to be flattened.

At this point, the best result would be for Ukraine to surrender and avoid horrendous civilian casualties.

I was going to write something cogent and reasoned, but given it's you and doing so would be pointless, I've decided to settle on

f.ck Off Tankie.

TopBadger wrote: Wed Mar 02, 2022 1:28 pm

Bird on a Fire wrote: Wed Mar 02, 2022 11:58 am Hasn't Russia got loads of aeroplanes? I'm sure I remember stuff about aeroplanes when they were destroying Syria.

Why are we still watching tanks trundle glacially across the landscape like it's the 1930s?

Perhaps he's simply keeping airpower "in his pocket" as a future escalation measure.

Perhaps Putin has calculated that if he brings airpower to bear that will increase sanctions and also his risk of NATO countries deciding to impose a no-fly zone, which would be a slap in the face, and bring more NATO armaments to bear in the area of Ukraine generally (because NATO will need ground units to defend the air defense), which then increases the risk of dragging NATO in.

It is odd though - usually first thing you do in an invasion is look to control the skies.

Certainly a No Fly Zone would be considered a high risk during the planning phase. I think the Kremlin may have calculated that air assault would mean a more vigorous US/EU response, with them not really expecting the level of response that occurred to the ground invasion.

The other difference between Ukraine and Syria/IS is that Ukraine has a modern air defense system, heavy anti-aircraft systems, and modern fighter jets, trained in Russian/Soviet tactics and equipment.

Air attacks on Ukraine would inevitably mean Russian losses, with easy photo-ops for wreckage and captured pilots (as they'd occur behind the front line). I don't think Russia was expecting the ease with which Ukraine has been able to get photo-ops with destroyed ground forces near the front lines.

bjn wrote: Wed Mar 02, 2022 3:15 pm

Herainestold wrote: Wed Mar 02, 2022 2:45 pm They have had some logistic problems (though much exaggerated, I fear) and they are biding their time. When the time comes they will destroy Kiev as they destroyed Grozny. One of Europe's major cities is about to be flattened.

At this point, the best result would be for Ukraine to surrender and avoid horrendous civilian casualties.

I was going to write something cogent and reasoned, but given it's you and doing so would be pointless, I've decided to settle on

f.ck Off Tankie.

There is no way Ukraine is going to prevail in this war without help from NATO. Which would lead to World War III, nukes, etc. So it won't happen.
So you have to look at the next step at providing security in Europe short of war. First step is stopping the carnage. Better to be a live Ukranian than a dead martyr.
From a western perspective it might be better for Ukraine to fight to the last man. That is making the Ukranians a proxy for westerners who are (rightly) afraid to fight.

Herainestold wrote: Wed Mar 02, 2022 3:29 pm There is no way Ukraine is going to prevail in this war without help from NATO. Which would lead to World War III, nukes, etc. So it won't happen.
So you have to look at the next step at providing security in Europe short of war. First step is stopping the carnage. Better to be a live Ukranian than a dead martyr.
From a western perspective it might be better for Ukraine to fight to the last man. That is making the Ukranians a proxy for westerners who are (rightly) afraid to fight.

This is correct. There isn't a long queue of forum members at the Ukrainian Embassy, going by responses on the International Brigade thread. All of us are demanding bravery and sacrifice from others.

We've had stuff on this forum like "make the invaders bleed so badly they give up" and "confront the lout in the pub". We've even had one forum member calling another forum member a coward. Which is a bit rich. When safe, relatively prosperous westerners call for a minority to suffer for the greater good it's pretty dodgy territory.

From the point of view of an individual domino, best to fall gently than be shattered. From the point of view of other dominos in the chain of dominos, best that the first one fights to the last man. This conflict is good news for the Baltic nations in particular.

In Britain, all we need to do is pay more for gas (which will accelerate renewables and insulation), plus take in four refugees. Five maybe, if we get a good strawberry crop and need an extra worker. OK, so it's a bit of an economic hit to all of us. But it's a long way from emerging from a basement into the rubble to chuck a Molotov Cocktail at Russian conscripts.