Ukraine

LeoV

Super Anarchist
12,719
3,768
The Netherlands
Russia and Ukraine have finally signed their deal to restart grain exports and avert the global food crisis. But lots of questions remain about how this is going to work in practice – and whether Russia can be trusted.

About missiles, Russia shot more then 2000. The question is, how many can Russia send and how many will they need as protection for themselves. Can not shoot hem all. Some estimate that Russia depleted half their stock.
 

enigmatically2

Super Anarchist
3,502
1,793
Earth
Depends on Putin's sanity levels. Realistically NATO (nor anyone else) will invade Russia even if they have no missiles left. But will Putin's paranoia prevent him realising that. You would think that 50% would be the minimum they should keep in reserve (especially when manufacturing more will be problematic with western sanctions.
However, Putin does seem to be going all in on Ukraine, so maybe they will fire the rest.
Though in contrast to UKr, Russia's targeting has been poor. A combination of poor intel/recon and less accurate missiles than the western ones means a lot have been aimed at civilian targets, which is horrific, but doesn't really degrade UKRs war effort.
 

LeoV

Super Anarchist
12,719
3,768
The Netherlands
He needs a few left for military parades... Only risk for Putin is rebellion in Belarus, I think.

No 300km missiles for Ukraine, but more Himars.
So soon Ukr will have 20 of them.

ps, 299km will do fine.
 

Stingray~

Super Anarchist
11,715
3,129
PNW
He needs a few left for military parades... Only risk for Putin is rebellion in Belarus, I think.

No 300km missiles for Ukraine, but more Himars.
So soon Ukr will have 20 of them.

ps, 299km will do fine.
Forgive my depressing take on things so far but I still see no good news out of any of this.

UKR is still getting slammed 6 months into it, they can't stop losing territory. Worse, RU continues to advance even if it is slowly, and RU shows absolutely no intention to stop their advances after destroying and occupying the Donbas first. They are not stopping at the Donetsk River. Kharkiv, UKR's second biggest city, looks to be their next attrition target. And it's hard to imagine UKR ever taking Kherson back without obliterating that city - and without killing untold numbers of civilians in there in the process. What a f'ing bloodbath.

The ONLY good news so far is the potentially workable agreement to get grain out of UKR by ship, to help alleviate massive human starvation in Africa. I hope that part at least works favorably, have been calling for a solution to that for several months already. Hopefully the agreement includes no matter who is in military control of those breadbasket farms.
 
Last edited:

Mark_K

Super Anarchist
Forgive my depressing take on things so far but I still see no good news out of any of this.

UKR is still getting slammed 6 months into it, they can't stop losing territory. Worse, RU continues to advance even if it is slowly, and RU shows absolutely no intention to stop their advances after destroying and occupying the Donbas first. They are not stopping at the Donetsk River. Kharkiv, UKR's second biggest city, looks to be their next attrition target. And it's hard to imagine UKR ever taking Kherson back without obliterating that city - and without killing untold numbers of civilians in there in the process. What a f'ing bloodbath.
It's early yet. George Foreman had the initiative for all but the last 20 seconds in Zaire.
 

Stingray~

Super Anarchist
11,715
3,129
PNW
It's early yet. George Foreman had the initiative for all but the last 20 seconds in Zaire.
Yes, it's early. There's a reasonable chance that western military firepower will eventually overwhelm the RU forces but it will take time, those 20 HIMARS are a drop in the bucket but could be a good start. Fingers crossed that Putin or those around him come to a hard realization at some point but we seem far away from that after these first almost-6 months. UKR is getting devastated, the whole thing is terribly one-sided and civilians (who I care most about) are getting their and their family's lives destroyed by the tens of thousands.

Both sides are so far keeping the conflict to within UKR but again, I think it's time to up the stakes and am very confident about NATO's ability to take them on starting within the Black Sea. Nail the subs and nail any missile-firing ships, just for starters.

The threat about tactical nukes is bullshit. None of that would actually help P, it's more likely very-very suicidal and he would know that..
 
Last edited:

Stingray~

Super Anarchist
11,715
3,129
PNW
Really? You're sure about that? You'd bet your NWP place in the sun?
I have remarked before about having a touch of 'survivalist' mentality over how serious this could get, cyber included. To relate it to all this, yes I did make the builders include additional access to one of the chimneys for another woodstove plus dry storage for chopped wood. Overreaction? Maybe, but when the power goes out around here for even a few hours it's a shocking thing for most folks since it's such a rarity. Utilities in the States have been cyber-impacted by RU cells, even before we started ramping up weaponry in response to this freakin' war to the tune of $B's.

To the much more serious: Obviously we can't be sure but strategically it makes little to no sense for P to do anything nuclear. It would poison for forever even the territory he had occupied.

Now I am worried about how many trees I have and how to take those cedar monsters down safely, for just in case I need more firewood :) Were I living in Germany, I may be making similar preparations for the coming winter.

Be glad you live in peaceful, beautiful, non-threatening NZ.
 
Last edited:

phill_nz

Super Anarchist
3,010
954
internet atm
Really? You're sure about that? You'd bet your NWP place in the sun?
it's a good bluff because no one wants to go all in when there is only one possible outcome

giving in to the bluff encourages its use to the point it no longer is a bluff ( painters corner )

never believing it and acting accordingly prevents it's use as a bluff and lowers the chances of them ever being used
 

Rennmaus

Super Anarchist
10,500
2,029
I found this interesting, about the resistance in the occupied regions.

 

LeoV

Super Anarchist
12,719
3,768
The Netherlands
Someone was convinced Russia would take Odessa, the whole coast, and East Ukraine, he could not see the Ukrainians hold it.
Someone was convinced missiles would destroy a lot of cities and logistics with a result of gridlocked Ukraine, could not think off Russia had to scale missile use back to mostly a few cities, trains and road transport still moving.
Someone is convinced Russia is taking ground and moving forward, does not recognize on the maps it is balanced now.
Someone says all the hurt is by Ukr civilians, not recognizing the Russian soldiers are civilians too, the kill/severely wounded numbers on their side is high. Russia turning into a dictatorship were everyone is afraid of everyone.
Someone says Ukraine gets demolished, forgetting that Russian equipment is going up in flames in the billions, with the help of donated arms.

On Russian missiles fired last 24 hrs, 8 missiles fired at military targets, airfield and depot, and six wildly inaccurate S-300 missiles at a city.
 

dogwatch

Super Anarchist
16,886
1,585
South Coast, UK
To the much more serious: Obviously we can't be sure but strategically it makes little to no sense for P to do anything nuclear. It would poison for forever even the territory he had occupied.

Poisoned for ever. Is that so? Have you told the 1.2M and 430K inhabitants respectively of modern Hiroshima and Nagasaki?

USA and RUS have both spent of order $10Bs (at least) on tactical nuclear weapons and both maintain them in the 100s to 1000s. Presumably they would not continue with that vast expense unless they were identified scenarios, distinct from MAD and its strategic weapons, in which they would play a part. Russian war games continue to rehearse use of tactical nukes. They play a key role in the alleged RUS doctrine of "escalate to deescalate", closely identified with the Putin era. https://www.russiamatters.org/analysis/escalate-deescalate-part-russias-nuclear-toolbox has a lengthy if inconclusive discussion of the topic.

For what it is worth, official Russian doctrine is The Russian Federation shall reserve the right to use nuclear weapons in response to the use of nuclear and other types of weapons of mass destruction against it and/or its allies, as well as in the event of aggression against the Russian Federation with the use of conventional weapons when the very existence of the state is in jeopardy. https://rusemb.org.uk/press/2029 To take that as face value and considering that the current Russian government is entirely invested in painting Crimea as integral to the Russian state, you might want to take your survivalist plans up a notch if UKR finds itself in a position to attempt its much repeated objective of retaking Crimea.
 

enigmatically2

Super Anarchist
3,502
1,793
Earth
1 day after the agreement to allow grain shipments (including ports loading them), Russia fires missiles at Odessa port.

The ban on targeting ports is probably why Russia wanted this deal- so UKR wouldn't target warships in Sevastopol
 

dogwatch

Super Anarchist
16,886
1,585
South Coast, UK
1 day after the agreement to allow grain shipments (including ports loading them), Russia fires missiles at Odessa port.

The ban on targeting ports is probably why Russia wanted this deal- so UKR wouldn't target warships in Sevastopol

I believe Sevastopol is out of range anyway with missiles supplied to date.

RUS is denying having carried out the attack. Now I'm as fond of calling them liars as anyone else but if you look at the footage at https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-62276392 it is not 100% clear there was a missile attack. Looks like a big pile of burning wood or tyres.
 
Last edited:
1658589734607.png

You can never trust the orcs.
 




Top