Jump to content

Alarich II

Members
  • Posts

    388
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

Alarich II's Achievements

Landed Knight

Landed Knight (6/8)

  1. Ahh, yes, the "common peoples justice", I can already see the strange fruit of that justice hanging from a tree....
  2. The problem is that Russia is bringing more, much more, artillery to bear at the moment. And apart from the Ukrainian losses, it also wears down morale as Ukrainian soldiers are being pounded and cannot (yet) retaliate in kind. I disagree, one interesting bit of information in the video I posted was his analysis why the southern pincer was more successful than the northern one. Basically the Russians found a weak spot in the Ukrainian territorial defence forces who are simply not as well trained and experienced as the Ukranian elite regiments who are being slowly reduced more and more. And this is important for the bigger picture as well: the Ukrainian forces who will come from their reserves and who are being trained right now, will not have the same quality wrt morale and experience than those who are fighting now on the front lines. They may be veterans in that they have already served their conscription time and some of them will have spent some time in the trenches, but that's not going to be the same. So the Ukrainian counterattack that we're talking about might not have as much power as we could hope from the sheer numbers. Russia activating their old tanks may look like a desperate measure (and maybe it is) but there are no big tank on tank battles. They pound the Ukrainian positions with artillery and the old T-62s will then support the infantry assault and that's something they can still do with reliable effectiveness. So it turns out that bringing artillery and lots of it, is going to decide this whole thing. I just hope that the US MRLS will come in sufficient quantities and in time, because I don't think that Ukraine can otherwise keep their positions in the Donbas region much longer.
  3. Analysis by the Austrian army (this time in English): Short summary: without modern MRLS Systems, the outlook is not great for Ukraine...
  4. I think their analysis is very solid, they don't make any predictions but rather explain tactics, strategies and outcomes, using publicly available evidence in a very neutral manner.
  5. Please continue! Amidst the war, the Greens in Germany are rapidly changing their profile: https://www.politico.eu/article/ukraine-war-recasts-germany-green-party-russia/ - hence the title...
  6. What? His Austrian dialect isn't that bad... Sorry! I thought that autotranslate would work.
  7. Very interesting analysis of the current battle in Donbas by an Austrian army colonel on the official Austrian army channel (for non German speakers, switch on the subtitles) with a comparison to the Battle of Kursk at the end:
  8. I think that one thing often gets overlooked here, is the Budapest Memorandum, where Russia, USA and GB are acting as guarantors of Ukrainian sovereignty in return for Ukraine handing over their nukes. So the question ist not only wether to help Ukraine or not but also: can and will the USA act on its guarantee? I mean really, what Russia did was not only breaking an international treaty that had once been heralded as an important step in the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons, but they basically also asked the other guarantors to break it as well by not acting in their guarantee. So this is not only about the red lines of Russia, but also those of the US and not only wrt NATO membership. Obamas failure to act on self-proclaimed red lines in Syria, declaring a national interest and then ceding it to Russia, and Trumps later failure to articulate any national interest beyond his own ego may have encouraged Putin to think that these red lines weren't all that red.
  9. He didn't actually say that, but he did say that alternatives to this endgame (full membership) should be considered in view of the long process and other countries that would also like to join. The tldr of his interview got condensed as "Austria rejects EU membership for Ukraine" first by Ukrainian media, then by Russian media who gleefully picked up this line as well. Given the Austrian ties to Russia, this interpretation is maybe understandable.
  10. I think, the context here is this: Schallenberg didn't say that they would veto it, but he (rightfully) pointed out, that there are other states too, waiting to join the EU (Albania, Bosnia, Serbia etc.) and that in view of these, there are maybe other models of close alignment that do not necessarily include full membership. Austrias sees itself as the link between the Balkans and Western Europe and strongly supports the accession bid of the Balkan countries. That gives them diplomatic influence especially against of growing Chinese influence in those countries. Creating a backdoor now that allows Ukraine in, but leaves them out, would weaken Austrias position. Also by most membership criteria, Ukraine still has a long way to go: It is very poor and still very corrupt, and that is already a problem in countries like Bulgaria, Romania and Hungary. No doubt, since the war began, Zelensky has increased his political captial and that will give him more room for reforms, once the war is over. Being a good war chief doesn't necessarily make you a good leader in peace time, though, so it is perhaps not unwise to think about alternatives to full membership, at least in the short/medium term.
  11. The fact, that the Ukrainians could carry out this strike seriously makes me wonder about the Russian air defence. An oil facility, close to the border, important for fuel supplies I presume, apparently unsecured and taken by surprise. One would have thought that this close to the war zone, they would at least have two AA-tanks stationed there to provide some kind of air cover in shifts. After 4 weeks of war, someone must have realized that Ukraine still has aerial capabilities. But on the videos that are out there, I don't see any AA fire (maybe they didn't use tracer rounds?), nothing. Just a sitting duck by the looks of it.
  12. The problem here is that Russia also has all these: airbases in quick striking distance, surveillance equipment etc. and in recent years they have - in contrast to their neighbours - actually used those assets against their neighbours. So to be aggrieved now, that their neighbours are preparing to defend is a bit rich. And wrt to Cuba: this crisis was 60 years ago and it concerned the deployment of nuclear missiles to cuba, not just any military hardware. And yet, 60 years later, Russia has deployed its nuclear SRBM system Iskander to the Kaliningrad oblast, basically putting Warsaw, Prague, Berlin, Kopenhagen, Stockholm, Helsinki, Tallin, Riga and Vilnius within range of their tactical nukes. And they are openly using it as a threat against Europe. We (Europeans) live with that and we're not turning this into some Cuban missile issue, but really, Russia should stfu about European anti-missile defences, threats to their national security and whatnot.
  13. The original WWI tanks also went out of fashion but the underlying idea to have a very mobile, armed unit that provides a certain measure of protection on the battlefield won't go away. Future units will probably look very different than the current MBTs but the concept of a tank will probably stay.
  14. Apparently Ukrainian forces have managed to strike at Russian ships that docked at the port of occupied Berdyansk and sunk the Orsk, a landing ship, - after a Russian propaganda video revealed the exact location of the ship. I guess it's still true that loose lips sink ships.
×
×
  • Create New...