Jump to content

Ukraine 21: On the Attack with a Giant Phallic Spear


DireWolfSpirit

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, Werthead said:

The only thing I can think of is that he's reached the end of Putin's rope and Putin's basically told him to deploy his troops or Russia will fuck him up personally, and I don't think Lukashenko can easily pivot to being in the anti-Putin camp and say no to him.

That's the only situation in which I can see Belarus joining the conflict.

It is true that Lukashenko doesn't have any other realistic patrons, since he would hardly get a warm welcome from NATO even if he came to them hat in hand.  But if Lukashenko says "I would do anything for [Russia], but I won't do [ground troops]", what can Putin really do about it?  Does Putin really have the power to order him removed?  I'm doubtful.  Putin certainly doesn't want to risk political chaos in Belarus because he doesn't exactly have spare troops waiting around to rush in and stabilize the situation (in Russia's favor).  There would be a real possibility of NATO and particularly the Baltic republics rallying support for an anti-Russia faction, up to and including providing weapons (if needed). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, DireWolfSpirit said:

Yes that is sobering. What is the likelyhood of a eventual Ukrainian ground invasion of Crimea?

I'd say pretty high. Assuming they can take back the rest of Ukraine and the West keeps supplying arms, Crimea will be completely isolated and Ukraine will have an army that vastly outpowers unsupplied Russian forces. It might take a year or more for this to happen though and Putin will hopefully not be around for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DireWolfSpirit said:

Yes that is sobering. What is the likelyhood of a eventual Ukrainian ground invasion of Crimea?

Further to the above, I think that Ukraine regards Crimea with some ambivalence. Restoring Crimea would also restore a large pro-Russian voting pool, although I suspect the likelihood of that tipping the balance in future elections to get a pro-Russian Ukrainian government is probably low for the next generation at least. There's also the historic and slightly irrational Russian regard for Crimea that might indeed make them using tactical nukes over Crimea at least somewhat more likely than over Donbas or Kherson or anywhere else. Ukraine also indicated a willingness earlier in the war for a refreshed referendum in Crimea under possible UN auspices and if they still voted to be part of Russia (which is at least somewhat likely) that would be respected. Recognition of Crimea as Russian is also a powerful diplomatic tool in Ukraine's arsenal for any eventual negotiations.

However, there is also the fact that Ukraine thinks that Russia getting away with taking Crimea in 2014 set it on its current course, and losing Crimea is probably the most likely way to triggering the removal of Putin. They've also now seen that defending against a land invasion via Crimea is very difficult, given that the Crimea-Ukraine border was quite heavily fortified before the war and they were only briefly able to slow the Russians down. Crimea being Russian might be a future launchpad for future invasions, whilst it being in Ukrainian hands makes a Russian invasion far more difficult.

At the moment the Ukrainian military has a way to go to get into position to retake Crimea, so it'll be a good problem to have in that sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Werthead said:

Although, one interesting bit from this is that Putin seems to regard a Ukrainian ground invasion of Crimea as the threshold for using tactical nuclear weapons.

It rather says "potential use" of nuclear weapons in case of invasion to Crimea, which is nothing new, even speaking about other teritories. If Russia is savvy enough to use Musk, it is savvy enough to make sure the message is exactly what they want people to think and not exactly the truth.

It will be interesting to hear if this call even happened though, because Russia is usually not that savvy. Unless he just barged in as an useful fool.

In any case, the truly interesting note seems to be about Ukrainians having issues with Starlink in retaken territories without a clear reason. Was there any explanation for that before?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Democrats should use Musk's cozying with Putin to try and swipe the Patriot Card away from Trumpublicans. You don't have to use it as an ugly bludgeon like they do, turn xenophobic with it, but you will have to embrace the idea of some broader America that includes the likes of Florida and Texas among the Good States. For this reason they will not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, a free shadow said:

In any case, the truly interesting note seems to be about Ukrainians having issues with Starlink in retaken territories without a clear reason. Was there any explanation for that before?

The fear is that captured Starlink units could be used to bolster Russian communications in the occupied territories, so they switch Starlink on and off depending on the satellite's GPS coordinates. Each satellite literally activates and deactivates as it passes over a specific area. When the Ukrainians were advancing, they outran Starlink's range and it sometimes took a few hours or even a day or two for them to update the satellite coverage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Maithanet said:

Kind of unusual in this war.  Perhaps the new Russian commander needed a reminder that this is not Syria and you cannot just send attack helicopters alone over enemy territory. 

 

 

I will never criticize Hollywood movies again for incompetent military characters. :P

(OK, that's not true, but wow art imitates life indeed)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Maithanet said:

Kind of unusual in this war.  Perhaps the new Russian commander needed a reminder that this is not Syria and you cannot just send attack helicopters alone over enemy territory. 

 

 

Good thing Russia appointed an Air Force general officer as the overall theater commander, as now they are using their air power appropriately.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

Wild Turkeys can and do fly.  I nearly hit a flying turkey driving from Beaufort to Hilton Head back in 2001.

I was involved in a high-speed collision (my friend was driving) with a very large goose which somehow managed to achieve perfect windshield altitude. I still remember it looking at us with considerable surprise just before impact, and the tremendous relief the windshield held (the car was very old) and we did not crash. The goose fared less well, I fear, as it was last seen cartwheeling into a hedge, although we were unable to locate it later on, so perhaps it survived. And swore vengeance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh we're back to poultry? In Europe we hardly have wild turkeys as they're not native birds, so the caged turkeys bred for mass meat production fly as well as the russian lies we talked abour earlier.

On the shot down helicopters -http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hp-fCtSNvWA&t=20m49s

Only in german (and sponsored by a neoliberal thinktank with libertarian tendencies) I'm afraid.

It states that the lack of prcision long range rockets causes the pilots to attempt idiotic maneuvres in order to reduce the risk of being shot down. 

Maybe General "Armageddon" is demanding hits now and the pilots feel forced to take the risk. Did the pilots eject?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't know how reliable this sort of thing is, but there's a report circulating that Russian killed + seriously wounded and unable to return to be 90k.  That presumably would not include DNR/LNR.  Considering the size of the invasion force was estimated anywhere from 180-240k Russian troops, that is a colossal loss rate. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

6 minutes ago, Lykos said:

On the shot down helicopters -http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hp-fCtSNvWA&t=20m49s

Only in german (and sponsored by a neoliberal thinktank with libertarian tendencies) I'm afraid.

It states that the lack of prcision long range rockets causes the pilots to attempt idiotic maneuvres in order to reduce the risk of being shot down. 

That goes in alignment with what we've seen for a few months now - that due to lack of PGMs and lack of giving any shits and not having air superiority, the air resources that Russia has have been doing long-range indirect fire actions where they'll pull up and shoot, hoping that they hit something vaguely in the direction of the enemy. This has been used a lot less in supporting the military forces and more in favor of blowing cities up, which tend to not move as much. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Lykos said:

Maybe General "Armageddon" is demanding hits now and the pilots feel forced to take the risk. Did the pilots eject?

Well there is a story going around Ukrainian media that at a recent meeting with subordinates, General Surovikin berated one of them so fiercely that the man pulled out a pistol and shot himself in the head.  Sounds like such a Bond villain kind of story I don't know if I believe it though. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...