Ukraine: “I don’t need a ride, I need Ammunition”.

[SeanF]

21 minutes ago, Werthead said:

Another report of Ukrainian civilians convincing Russian forces to turn around and leave by talking and jeering at them in Russian, and refusing to roll over.

Extremely brave, bearing in mind Ukrainian civilian militia and ununiformed reservists are attacking Russian forces all over the country, so the Russians might have felt justified in shooting them all.

Lol at the Tolkien reference.

I guess many Russians feel the same way as if our government decided to invade Ireland.

[Werthead]

The Russian Central Bank making appeals for urgent calm after some signs of a run on the banks following the announcement of new sanctions.

In a personal blow, the International Judo Federation has suspended Putin as honorary president of the organisation.

A second Russian attack on Chernihiv was repelled, with signs that the Russians may have to completely give up on it to reinforce the attack on Kyiv (a bad idea if there are any regular forces in Chernihiv which feel like breaking out and hitting the Russians as they pass).

The TOS-1A thermobaric missile launcher has been seen on the highway between Kyiv and Sumy, which is highly alarming.

 

[sologdin]

am unpersuaded by the timeframe analyses, to be honest.  they require assumptions about the invader's objectives, one way or the other, assumptions that can't be known, certainly not on the basis of either belligerent's overt pronouncements. maybe 50 km in three days is slow, and maybe not.  maybe it means something, maybe not. much of it is bssed on wishful thinking that some unknown frodo is making his solitary way to orodruin.

that said, my wishful thinking is the effectiveness of the international response, such as the british encouragement of lincoln brigades.

[Varysblackfyre321]

6 minutes ago, sologdin said:

am unpersuaded by the timeframe analyses, to be honest.  they require assumptions about the invader's objectives, one way or the other, assumptions that can't be known, certainly not on the basis of either belligerent's overt pronouncements. maybe 50 km in three days is slow, and maybe not.  maybe it means something, maybe not. much of it is bssed on wishful thinking that some unknown frodo is making his solitary way to orodruin.

that said, my wishful thinking is the effectiveness of the international response, such as the british encouragement of lincoln brigades.

True, as has been noted multiple times, all sides have motivation to exaggerate their own victories and progress and downplay their enemies victories and progress.

[Spockydog]

31 minutes ago, Werthead said:

The TOS-1A thermobaric missile launcher has been seen on the highway between Kyiv and Sumy, which is highly alarming.

The backlash against them will be even greater if they start using this weapon to clear Kyiv.

I mean, they used that shit in Syria with impunity. Although, pretty sure Western media will pay far more attention when it's white Christians, women and children, being incinerated and/or suffocated.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

50 minutes ago, Werthead said:

British defence analysts this morning saying that Russia has committed at least 50% of the forces they had surrounding Ukraine already, and what's left is probably their strategic reserve for the operation, which may have been ear-marked for post-conflict occupation and relieving the front line troops. Russia may need to commit them to take Kyiv and Kharkiv (which is somehow still holding out), but will be left with nothing to fall back on. If the Ukrainians weather a second wave of attacks, Russia will have to amass another force to invade (which could take months, during which Ukraine would be heavily resupplied and reinforced), resort to high-damage weapons to force the issue or, well, give up.

 

The main push on Kyiv failed to materialise overnight, with Russian reinforcements reportedly still 10km outside the city and, in some cases, getting bogged down in heavy fighting in areas they'd supposedly already cleared. The expected heavy bombardment of Kyiv also failed to materialise

I'm pretty sure they forgot to scan their ClubCards. Rookie error.

Is anyone saying there is actual hope of the Ukrainians successfully stopping or even pushing back the Russians?  Clearly the Russians aren’t performing as well as expected… but can this translate into a potential strategic victory for the Ukrainians over the Russians?

[Werthead]

I think the temptation to play up Ukrainian successes is strong, but there is overwhelming evidence that the Ukrainians are resisting the Russian attack on multiple fronts with a lot of success. It's easy to see red areas spreading across the map, but without taking major cities it's not significant (especially because Ukrainian forces also seem to be wandering back into those regions and attacking supply lines and reinforcements afterwards): it's like those "Republican areas" of the Midwest which are uninhabited desert.

Whilst it is easy to exaggerate Ukrainian successes and say they are meaningless, they are in fact highly significant: delaying the Russian victory by one more day costs the Kremlin an immense amount in prestige, manpower, morale and money. Russia cannot sustain a high-intensity military campaign with modern, expensive missiles, tanks, jets and weapons for months on end. The country's economy will not allow it and its armament factories cannot churn out replacements at a high rate, it's not geared up for it. This is not the United States, which could have sustained such a campaign for years if necessary (maybe ramping up debts and making economists shudder) without materially really noticing it. The Russians have turned themselves into Germany in 1941, except that they're churning through their supplies at a far, far more appalling rate, and the disparity in numbers versus technology is nowhere near as much in their favour as it was the Germans'.

Quote

Is anyone saying there is actual hope of the Ukrainians successfully stopping or even pushing back the Russians?  Clearly the Russians aren’t performing as well as expected… but may this translate into a potential strategic victory for the Ukrainians over the Russians?

I'd say the international line has gone from "Russian victory is an inevitable fact" to "Russian victory is extremely likely." So it's gone from maybe 99% a done deal to 90%. Ukraine is unlikely to win a military victory in the field over the Russians. However, it can exhaust the Russian capacity to fight in this first wave (and it maybe halfway there already). Russia will of course win in any long-term conflict, but it may be required to mobilise far more troops and weapons than it was prepared for.

The main hope for a positive outcome is a negotiated settlement where Ukraine retains its independence in return for neutrality guarantees. Putin may feel he can spin that as a win and leave with his head held high, and try to weather the humiliation of Russia's performance as Western propaganda.

The key to that will be Russia's willingness to attack urban areas in overwhelming force: Kharkiv may be a trial run for Kyiv. If Russia is obviously unwilling to inflict large numbers of civilian casualties, then its prospects for a quick victory are limited. They might take Ukraine's Parliament buildings and Presidential Palace, and drive tanks through the city centre and even install a puppet government, but that's kind of meaningless if Ukraine's military continues fighting and the population refuses to cooperate and the government evacuates (or a new government is established in Lviv or even outside Ukraine altogether). Shades of Napoleon taking Moscow and saying, "I've won!" and being not just puzzled but completely bamboozled when the Russians continued resisting and attacking (hopefully the Ukrainians don't decide to torch Kyiv rather than surrender).

The price Russia has paid so far is absurd, and it's clear now that this will continue for as long as the Ukrainians can bring supplies in from the West. If the Russians can take Kyiv and Odesa and advance on Lviv, that might help them in cutting off resupplies, but there are a lot of other problems with that as well (like feeding the population, unless the Russians want to be responsible for the Holodomor Mk. II).

It's also worth nothing that comparisons to the Russians in Syria or the US in Iraq are meaningless: at no point in those former conflicts was Russia basically put under an aerial blockade along its entire western border, at no point did it lose control of its government websites and information sources, and it certainly did not have to put out advisories and warnings telling people not to panic-buy or strip the banks of money. At no point were tens to hundreds of thousands of Russian businesses cut off from all their customers outside Russia. Russia is hurting from this.

[IheartIheartTesla]

58 minutes ago, Werthead said:

Russia may need to commit them to take Kyiv and Kharkiv (which is somehow still holding out), but will be left with nothing to fall back on. If the Ukrainians weather a second wave of attacks, Russia will have to amass another force to invade (which could take months, during which Ukraine would be heavily resupplied and reinforced), resort to high-damage weapons to force the issue or, well, give up.

Per the Guardian, a former Ukrainian defense minister seemed to think Belarus would declare war on Ukraine and send in airborne troops. Presumably as a personal demand from Putin. Not sure if this is accurate at all, but wouldnt be surprising that Putin is pressuring his few allies for help in shoring up his attack.

[Darzin]

10 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

Is anyone saying there is actual hope of the Ukrainians successfully stopping or even pushing back the Russians?  Clearly the Russians aren’t performing as well as expected… but can this translate into a potential strategic victory for the Ukrainians over the Russians?

It's possible the Russians get very bogged down trying to take Kiev, that will be ugly but it could also lead to a months long battle and a lot of loses for the Russians.

Otherwise if Kiev falls the Russians with already straining logistics might be unable to push into Wester Ukraine. Though the big test will be if Ukrainian morale and command and control can survive the fall of Kiev. I wouldn't rate these as likely but they are within the realm of possibility. 

[SeanF]

4 minutes ago, Werthead said:

I think the temptation to play up Ukrainian successes is strong, but there is overwhelming evidence that the Ukrainians are resisting the Russian attack on multiple fronts with a lot of success. It's easy to see red areas spreading across the map, but without taking major cities it's not significant (especially because Ukrainian forces also seem to be wandering back into those regions and attacking supply lines and reinforcements afterwards): it's like those "Republican areas" of the Midwest which are uninhabited desert.

Whilst it is easy to exaggerate Ukrainian successes and say they are meaningless, they are in fact highly significant: delaying the Russian victory by one more day costs the Kremlin an immense amount in prestige, manpower, morale and money. Russia cannot sustain a high-intensity military campaign with modern, expensive missiles, tanks, jets and weapons for months on end. The country's economy will not allow it and its armament factories cannot churn out replacements at a high rate, it's not geared up for it. This is not the United States, which could have sustained such a campaign for years if necessary (maybe ramping up debts and making economists shudder) without materially really noticing it. The Russians have turned themselves into Germany in 1941, except that they're churning through their supplies at a far, far more appalling rate, and the disparity in numbers versus technology is nowhere near as much in their favour as it was the Germans'.

I'd say the international line has gone from "Russian victory is an inevitable fact" to "Russian victory is extremely likely." So it's gone from maybe 99% a done deal to 90%. Ukraine is unlikely to win a military victory in the field over the Russians. However, it can exhaust the Russian capacity to fight in this first wave (and it maybe halfway there already). Russia will of course win in any long-term conflict, but it may be required to mobilise far more troops and weapons than it was prepared for.

The main hope for a positive outcome is a negotiated settlement where Ukraine retains its independence in return for neutrality guarantees. Putin may feel he can spin that as a win and leave with his head held high, and try to weather the humiliation of Russia's performance as Western propaganda.

The key to that will be Russia's willingness to attack urban areas in overwhelming force: Kharkiv may be a trial run for Kyiv. If Russia is obviously unwilling to inflict large numbers of civilian casualties, then its prospects for a quick victory are limited. They might take Ukraine's Parliament buildings and Presidential Palace, and drive tanks through the city centre and even install a puppet government, but that's kind of meaningless if Ukraine's military continues fighting and the population refuses to cooperate and the government evacuates (or a new government is established in Lviv or even outside Ukraine altogether). Shades of Napoleon taking Moscow and saying, "I've won!" and being not just puzzled but completely bamboozled when the Russians continued resisting and attacking (hopefully the Ukrainians don't decide to torch Kyiv rather than surrender).

The price Russia has paid so far is absurd, and it's clear now that this will continue for as long as the Ukrainians can bring supplies in from the West. If the Russians can take Kyiv and Odesa and advance on Lviv, that might help them in cutting off resupplies, but there are a lot of other problems with that as well (like feeding the population, unless the Russians want to be responsible for the Holodomor Mk. II).

Two things have surprised me.  1.  Western military equipment is actually very effective.  2.  British and US intelligence has been outstanding.

[Werthead]

Just now, SeanF said:

Two things have surprised me.  1.  Western military equipment is actually very effective.  2.  British and US intelligence has been outstanding.

Yup. Raytheon, who makes both the Javelin anti-tank missile (which is surprisingly effective against helicopters as well) and the Stinger anti-air missile, are getting a ton of free advertising from Putin. They should send him a food hamper or something.

A Russian T-90 being totalled by a Javelin at close range. The comments (once you wade through those bemoaning the loss of Antonov's very silly big plane) seem divided on whether the crew were still inside or had been evacuated (it might be the same tank seen earlier refusing to drive through the villagers, although there's also claims that may not have been down to Russian goodwill but they'd run out of fuel).

 

[sologdin]

how to know that these antonov videos represent what they are alleged to represent?

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

16 minutes ago, sologdin said:

how to know that these antonov videos represent what they are alleged to represent?

We don’t.  We hope.

[Alarich II]

Scholz just announced an a list of things that mark an radical shift in defence policies, away from the "peace dividend" policies of the last 30 years across all German governments:

- Extra 100 billion special defence fund

- Additional annual defence budget increase to 2%+ of GDP, which is about a 30% increase

- additional investment into the modernization of the nuclear carriers (possibly F-35)

- Aquisition of armed drones from Israel

Now, we have to remember that we are talking about a center-left coalition that includes an explicit anti-war party (the Greens), so this is a very significant shift. Within basically 3 days, it seems that a new consensus, that reaches even into the left-wing pacifist camp, is "si vis pacem, para bellum".

[SeanF]

1 minute ago, Alarich II said:

Scholz just announced an a list of things that mark an radical shift in defence policies, away from the "peace dividend" policies of the last 30 years across all German governments:

- Extra 100 billion special defence fund

- Additional annual defence budget increase to 2%+ of GDP, which is about a 30% increase

- additional investment into the modernization of the nuclear carriers (possibly F-35)

- Aquisition of armed drones from Israel

Now, we have to remember that we are talking about a center-left coalition that includes an explicit anti-war party (the Greens), so this is a very significant shift. Within basically 3 days, it seems that a new consensus, that reaches even into the left-wing pacifist camp, is "si vis pacem, para bellum".

In the end, I think most European leaders have stepped up to the mark.

[Fez]

28 minutes ago, sologdin said:

how to know that these antonov videos represent what they are alleged to represent?

If the videos have been geolocated that would be a big first step. Though I dunno how you do that or if it's been done.

[DMC]

1 hour ago, sologdin said:

am unpersuaded by the timeframe analyses, to be honest. 

Agreed, if it takes the Russians another week, or two, or three, the length of time isn't gonna matter in the long run (albeit the cost imposed by the Ukrainians will).

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

1 minute ago, DMC said:

Agreed, if it takes the Russians another week, or two, or three, the length of time isn't gonna matter in the long run (albeit the cost imposed by the Ukrainians will).

The longer this takes the more it costs Putin.

[Loge]

Putin is readying his nukes. I guess this means the war isn't going well for him at all.

[DMC]

6 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

The longer this takes the more it costs Putin.

Not necessarily.