Raja Posted February 10, 2022 Share Posted February 10, 2022 3 hours ago, polishgenius said: It's okay though, she's only there as a distraction anyway This went as well as I thought it may have Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loge Posted February 10, 2022 Share Posted February 10, 2022 1 hour ago, DireWolfSpirit said: It had seemed as if Germany's position was cryptic previous to this though. I had been uncertain whether they were in agreement over using Nord Stream capacity as leverage or they were at loggerheads. Scholz hasn't commented on Nord Stream 2 since that press conference, no mater how hard journalists prodded. If his silence indicates assent to the US administration's position, it was definitely given grudgingly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Drewy Posted February 11, 2022 Share Posted February 11, 2022 Keir Starmer vows to support Ukraine: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/feb/10/labour-nato-british-left-ukraine-keir-starmer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loge Posted February 11, 2022 Share Posted February 11, 2022 Macron's visit to Moscow must have gone really well. Putin went out of his way to make him feel comfortable: https://www.politico.eu/article/soft-furnishings-power-the-politics-of-putins-massive-table/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalbear Posted February 11, 2022 Author Share Posted February 11, 2022 Per US intel Putin has communicated to Russian army plans to invade: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DireWolfSpirit Posted February 11, 2022 Share Posted February 11, 2022 So is a pipeline getting bombed I'm wondering? They basically said it, now will they do it, because a bully has called this bluff the moment he takes his army over that border. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DMC Posted February 12, 2022 Share Posted February 12, 2022 Clarification/walking back from NSA Jake Sullivan: Quote Sullivan said Biden is expected to call Russian President VLADIMIR PUTIN soon. A senior administration official later confirmed a call between the two leaders will take place on Saturday. Sullivan also appeared to push back on reporting from PBS’ NICK SCHIFRIN, who tweeted earlier on Friday that the Russian president has “decided to invade Ukraine, and has communicated that decision to the Russian military.” Sullivan said that PBS’ reporting “does not accurately capture what the US government's view is today. Our view is that we do not believe he has made any final decision, or we don't know that he has made any final decision and we have not communicated that to anybody." Asked about whether the network stood by its claims, a PBS spokesperson told West Wing Playbook that Shifrin would be on the network’s broadcast at 6pm ET to discuss his reporting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Werthead Posted February 12, 2022 Share Posted February 12, 2022 Last week they said Russia had about 70% of the needed combat power to invade, but yesterday there were reports of medical units looking like they were being activated and moved to the front, which is one of the last steps you take before being able to go. So maybe they're almost there. The Russian naval exercises in the Black Sea reportedly almost sealed off the Sea of Azov and the Ukrainian city of Mariupol, which was also concerning, though today they reportedly had back down and reopened the sea lanes. If Russia is planning to invade, the timing may not be quite up to them. They need the ground to reach its maximum freeze levels to support heavy armour and vehicles moving off-road, and that can happen any time in February or later, but it's a bit of a crap shoot precisely when. Russia can evade that problem by focusing any invasion along main roads instead, though. There seems to be a feeling that the moment of crisis is now and for the next ~2-3 weeks. At that point you have the ground turning to mud, and the exercises in Belarus end and Russia either has to come up with an excuse to keep 30,000+ troops mobilised in another country or send them home (not they need the Belarusian forces at all for an invasion, but it does act as a suitable threat to Kyiv). The UK has also issued an advisory advising against all travel to Ukraine and asking British people already there to leave, following the US doing the same thing last week. On 2/10/2022 at 5:15 PM, Raja said: This went as well as I thought it may have Yeah, Truss is a fucking idiot who probably has difficulty finding Russia on a map, let alone Rostov. The only person less suitable in this role would be Boris himself. Quote Macron's visit to Moscow must have gone really well. Putin went out of his way to make him feel comfortable: https://www.politico.eu/article/soft-furnishings-power-the-politics-of-putins-massive-table/ Yeah, that was weird. Officially, it was because Macron refused to take a COVID test in Russia because he feared his DNA getting into Russian hands (in case they clone him?) so they had to socially distance him from Putin. It is amusing that he completely shrugged that off and then talked to Putin for five hours straight in some kind of endurance test that neither wanted to back down from, since nothing substantial changed as a result of that meeting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clueless Northman Posted February 12, 2022 Share Posted February 12, 2022 Well since Putin met Orban with that same silly big table, it wasn't just a dig against NATO or Macron. Still pointless: covid is airborne, if you stay for 5 hours in that room, a 5-m wide table won't protect you at all. Waiting for frozen ground only makes sense if you intend a blitz, you get in, you crush the opposition, and you're out before the weather warms up. Otherwise, it might be better to wait until it's not mud anymore, in a few months, and you actually have several months worth of tank manoeuvres ahead. All in all, if Putin actually plans to invade and if he ends up invading, this would be the most predictable and obvious invasion since Iraq in 2003. Not exactly the greatest strategy ever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maithanet Posted February 13, 2022 Share Posted February 13, 2022 Semi naive question. Are tank traps still viable? Because with all this time to prepare plus modern equipment, you could make some pretty formidable tank traps pretty fast. But I don't know if that would even be useful anymore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DMC Posted February 13, 2022 Share Posted February 13, 2022 19 minutes ago, Clueless Northman said: Waiting for frozen ground only makes sense if you intend a blitz, you get in, you crush the opposition, and you're out before the weather warms up. Otherwise, it might be better to wait until it's not mud anymore, in a few months, and you actually have several months worth of tank manoeuvres ahead. Yeah I think this emphasis on frozen ground by both the media and leaders alike is overblown and a bit silly, if not anachronistic. Yes, if they're forced to stay on the roads the tanks would be more vulnerable to Javelins, but any invasion is going to in large part entail bombing the shit out of Ukraine from, ya know, the air - where winter weather can actually complicate operations. As this FP article (paywalled) explains, a little mud won't stop Putin - Frozen ground may aid a Russian invasion of Ukraine, but it’s not a decisive factor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maltaran Posted February 13, 2022 Share Posted February 13, 2022 16 hours ago, Werthead said: Yeah, that was weird. Officially, it was because Macron refused to take a COVID test in Russia because he feared his DNA getting into Russian hands (in case they clone him?) so they had to socially distance him from Putin. Sounds a bit Dr Strangelove - precious bodily fluids! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loge Posted February 13, 2022 Share Posted February 13, 2022 9 hours ago, Maithanet said: Semi naive question. Are tank traps still viable? Because with all this time to prepare plus modern equipment, you could make some pretty formidable tank traps pretty fast. But I don't know if that would even be useful anymore. I doubt it. Road blocks may still work in the mountains or other difficult terrain, but tanks are designed to operate off-road. Blowing up critical infrastructure like bridges may me more effective. From what I have read the Russian army depends heavily on the railway for logistics, so if Ukraine can deny them that it may slow them down significantly. 9 hours ago, DMC said: Yeah I think this emphasis on frozen ground by both the media and leaders alike is overblown and a bit silly, if not anachronistic. Yes, if they're forced to stay on the roads the tanks would be more vulnerable to Javelins, but any invasion is going to in large part entail bombing the shit out of Ukraine from, ya know, the air - where winter weather can actually complicate operations. As this FP article (paywalled) explains, a little mud won't stop Putin - Frozen ground may aid a Russian invasion of Ukraine, but it’s not a decisive factor. That article is a great example of "but this time it's different!" Modern tanks can deal with mud but everybody else will have a hard time following them, so who is going to resupply them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DMC Posted February 13, 2022 Share Posted February 13, 2022 7 minutes ago, Loge said: Modern tanks can deal with mud but everybody else will have a hard time following them, so who is going to resupply them? While the article notes the additional logistical buildup of the current effort, that's..really not the point of the article. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loge Posted February 13, 2022 Share Posted February 13, 2022 3 hours ago, DMC said: While the article notes the additional logistical buildup of the current effort, that's..really not the point of the article. Well, the article claims that the mud is an inconvenience at most. It doesn't really say why, other than "technology has advanced." Not a very convincing argument. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DMC Posted February 13, 2022 Share Posted February 13, 2022 4 minutes ago, Loge said: Well, the article claims that the mud is an inconvenience at most. It doesn't really say why, other than "technology has advanced." Not a very convincing argument. The point is that weather is not going to be the determinative factor of when Putin decides to invade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loge Posted February 13, 2022 Share Posted February 13, 2022 4 minutes ago, DMC said: The point is that weather is not going to be the determinative factor of when Putin decides to invade. I got that. I just don't see a justification. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DMC Posted February 13, 2022 Share Posted February 13, 2022 4 minutes ago, Loge said: I got that. I just don't see a justification. The justification is provided, you just don't agree with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
polishgenius Posted February 13, 2022 Share Posted February 13, 2022 I don't see how 'modern armies can deal with mud' is an insurmountable logical leap. I mean, maybe not the American army. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry of the Lawn Posted February 13, 2022 Share Posted February 13, 2022 It's a tight window, Putin needs to avoid tank-devouring mud, to wait until the Olympics are over, and of course, to make new maps that will circumvent the old adage about "don't start a land war in Asia" with some creative new labelling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.