Ukraine: Slava Ukraini!!!

[Werthead]

6 hours ago, Maithanet said:

According to Twitter defense people, the US notified the Russians of bidens visit a couple hours before it happened.  Interesting.

Even Russia doesn't want to deal with the headache of killing the US President accidentally.

If they did it on purpose, then that would of course be a declaration of war and, extremely shortly after that, the Russian adventure in Ukraine would come to an end.

[Jace, Extat]

1 hour ago, Werthead said:

Even Russia doesn't want to deal with the headache of killing the US President accidentally.

If they did it on purpose, then that would of course be a declaration of war and, extremely shortly after that, the Russian adventure in Ukraine would come to an end...

They would soon discover that skies remain undarkened as a matter of courtesy 

Necessity drives... 

Invention drives necessity now

 

 

 

 

O

b

e

y

[Kalbear]

Looks like this set of Republicans is making me wrong - most of them are backing even more aid to Ukraine and are stating their hopes for Ukraine to get f16s. While there are some who are against it (and put a resolution to that effect) at least right now Mccarthy is vocally against that.

https://us.cnn.com/2023/02/19/politics/mike-turner-mike-mccaul-ukraine-military-cnntv

[A True Kaniggit]

26 minutes ago, Kalnestk Oblast said:

Looks like this set of Republicans is making me wrong - most of them are backing even more aid to Ukraine and are stating their hopes for Ukraine to get f16s. While there are some who are against it (and put a resolution to that effect) at least right now Mccarthy is vocally against that.

https://us.cnn.com/2023/02/19/politics/mike-turner-mike-mccaul-ukraine-military-cnntv

Well doesn’t U.S. support for Ukraine remain high?

Being pro Russian seems like a losing strategy for the next election.

[Kalbear]

14 minutes ago, A True Kaniggit said:

Well doesn’t U.S. support for Ukraine remain high?

Being pro Russian seems like a losing strategy for the next election.

It's high but fading, and more importantly it is very unpopular with Trump and mcbigski.

[A True Kaniggit]

14 minutes ago, Kalnestk Oblast said:

It's high but fading, and more importantly it is very unpopular with Trump and mcbigski.

So being pro Russian seems like a losing strategy for the next election.

[3CityApache]

8 hours ago, A True Kaniggit said:

So being pro Russian seems like a losing strategy for the next election.

At least for mcbigski.

[Zorral]

Opinion  They said tanks were obsolete. Now, Ukraine can’t get enough of them.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2023/02/20/tanks-ukraine-war-missiles-mobility/

Quote

 

Vladimir Putin, obsessed with the Red Army’s capture of Berlin in 1945, clearly thought that his columns of tanks advancing on Kyiv from Belarus almost a year ago would bring rapid victory. Many of the crews adopted the idea of their World War II predecessors and attached iron bedsteads to the exterior of their armor, hoping that they would detonate any antitank missiles prematurely. Instead, it raised the profile of their vehicles and attracted the attention of Ukrainian groups hunting them on foot with shoulder-borne missile launchers.

Those hunters took to their task with enthusiasm, shredding Russia’s armored columns and sending Putin’s forces reeling back toward the border. This extraordinary debacle prompted many military commentators in the West to conclude that the era of the tank was finally over.

How wrong they were. Over the past few months, we’ve seen what amounts to a remarkable revival of the role of the main battle tank — and by the very same people who seemed to be accelerating its demise last spring. Ukraine’s pleas for heavy armor have finally been answered. After long hesitation, 12 Western countries, known as the “tank coalition,” have responded with promises of Leopards, Abrams and Challengers — amounting to more than 200 of them, almost an entire armored division.

But the Ukrainians want even more. They clearly don’t think tanks are obsolete — and they’re right. ....

[Here follows description where and why tanks don't / can't be effective force.]

.... But the Ukrainians face different challenges: above all, how to retake territory wrested from them by a numerically vastly superior Russian force. And offense is the realm where main battle tanks, when used correctly, can produce unrivaled results. Much depends on how they are deployed in combined arms operations, preferably with drone support and air cover from fighters that might yet be provided by European allies. Ukrainian crews have shown great ingenuity in extending the range of the 125mm main armament on captured Russian tanks by up to 10 kilometers. This is done by increasing their elevation and by targeting with drone spotters.

Once they arrive on the battlefield, the Ukrainians’ new weapons should prove instrumental in resisting any renewed Russian onslaughts. But if Kyiv can master the art of combining its tanks with infantry, drones and air assets, the Ukrainian army might well want to punch a hole in Russian defense lines in eastern or southern Donbas to provoke a chaotic retreat.

In either case, far from seeing the end of the tank era predicted so recently, we would witness a full-blooded replay of World War II tank tactics. The compulsion to summon echoes of World War II should, however, be firmly resisted even if the Ukrainians do decide to use the tanks together as an armored fist. The contemporary problem they face could well be an attack by drone swarms, so much will depend on the rapid delivery of fighter aircraft. Allied tanks are far better protected than the old Soviet-era T-72s, but their tracks remain vulnerable and a hit there could bring them to a halt.

Even so, the West is clearly betting that an influx of main battle tanks can help the Ukrainians make important territorial gains — of which the most critical would involve Crimea. Kevin Kühnert, the secretary general of German Chancellor Olaf Scholz’s own Social Democratic Party, recently stated that there were “no restrictions on the territories that Ukraine could liberate with the help of German tanks,” even if Scholz himself clearly remains nervous.

The thinking is clear. Putin’s reputation and support in Russia were built on the seizure of Crimea in 2014. Its recapture with the help of the “tank coalition” thus represents the best way of bringing him down and avoiding the dangers of a frozen conflict. Only a relatively small advance is needed to bring his bridge over the Kerch Strait to the Crimean peninsula under direct fire, provoking a panic-stricken exit by recent Russian settlers. Whether NATO tanks will arrive in time to accomplish the breakthrough needed to achieve that climax will be one of the key questions in the outcome of the war.

 

This was discussed in detail in the varieties of media, including here, where I, despite Knowing Nothing! participated, at least certainly read carefully! that tanks were over, this isn't WWII era, etc. which, as the elided part of the article shows, isn't necessarily untrue, but still, is no longer true in this particular case.  What else in our thinking/perception will change over a year?

~~~~~~~

More wrt Ukraine war and tanks and other weapons.

Some of the Best Weapons in the World Are Now in Ukraine. They May Change the War.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/20/opinion/ukraine-russia-tanks-offensive.html

Quote

 

Tens of billions of dollars of weapons have flowed from European and North American countries into Ukraine. Rifles. Bullets. Missiles. Artillery pieces.

At first, those nations insisted that the weapons were “defensive,” designed to help Ukraine fight off a marauding Russian Army that had stormed, unprovoked, across the border.

One year later, as the battered but still potent Russian military prepares for a renewed offensive, the type of weapons heading into Ukraine have changed dramatically. Now, what’s flowing in from the West are armored vehicles, long-range rockets and advanced tanks.

The distinction between offensive and defensive weapons was always a little arbitrary. Now, though, Ukraine will have the ability to play offense and potentially drive Russia out of their country using some of the best weapons in the world. That means the stakes for all sides have increased substantially. ....

.... As the Russian assault largely ground to a halt — or even reversed, in places such as Kyiv Oblast — arms transfers to Ukraine began to include more weapons designed for attacking rather than defending. In successive batches starting last spring, Poland donated more than 200 old tanks. Some were ex-Soviet T-72s. Others were locally-made variants of the same Soviet type.

Those tanks were some of the first evidence of a shift to offensive weaponry from foreign nations. That shift accelerated over the summer as the United States and other allies began sending armored personnel carriers — fast-moving, tracked vehicles that transport infantry into battle so they can support the tanks that usually lead any attack. The United States, the Netherlands, Spain, Lithuania, Germany, Australia and other countries donated more than 1,400 of those vehicles, many of them American-designed M-113s. ....

 

 

[Werthead]

Weaksauce speech from Putin. Lots of rhetoric about the nasty west oppressing Russia by giving them tens of billions of dollars a year (I guess), but not much substance. Withdrawing from START - as much of a nuclear threat as he could make given Chinese opprobrium - became way less significant when the Kremlin immediately said it was a suspension that could restart at any time. Otherwise no new mobilisation, no declaration of victory, not really anything of substance to go on.

The rhetoric did seem to dampen the fires about this new Chinese peace plan. Apparently France and Germany have been briefed and they said it seemed fine, as it acknowledged Ukraine's need for territorial sovereignty and thus the withdrawal of Russian forces, possibly with some debate over the timing of when Ukraine could join NATO. It does sound more like the kind of deal that could have flown in March or April 2022 and probably won't today, but as a starting point for mediation it might have at least gotten some traction. But Putin doubling down on his reasoning for the conflict makes it sound like a non-starter from the Russian POV. I'd assumed that China would only go public with a peace plan if it had been discussed with Russia behind the scenes first, but perhaps not.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

19 minutes ago, Werthead said:

Weaksauce speech from Putin. Lots of rhetoric about the nasty west oppressing Russia by giving them tens of billions of dollars a year (I guess), but not much substance. Withdrawing from START - as much of a nuclear threat as he could make given Chinese opprobrium - became way less significant when the Kremlin immediately said it was a suspension that could restart at any time. Otherwise no new mobilisation, no declaration of victory, not really anything of substance to go on.

The rhetoric did seem to dampen the fires about this new Chinese peace plan. Apparently France and Germany have been briefed and they said it seemed fine, as it acknowledged Ukraine's need for territorial sovereignty and thus the withdrawal of Russian forces, possibly with some debate over the timing of when Ukraine could join NATO. It does sound more like the kind of deal that could have flown in March or April 2022 and probably won't today, but as a starting point for mediation it might have at least gotten some traction. But Putin doubling down on his reasoning for the conflict makes it sound like a non-starter from the Russian POV. I'd assumed that China would only go public with a peace plan if it had been discussed with Russia behind the scenes first, but perhaps not.

Chinese peace plan?

[Werthead]

1 hour ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

Chinese peace plan?

Yeah, it was something floating around that the weekend. The Chinese had some kind of proposal that they'd been working on and run past the foreign ministries in Germany and France. They're discussing it with the Russians tomorrow.

Nobody seems too excited about it because it seems to be lacking in hard proposals, and its commitment to "Ukraine's territorial integrity" is undefined (is that its 2013 territory, its February 2022 territory or it's right now territory?). The significance is that China has so far not really intervened in the war and this intervention might at least get the Russians' attention.

[Werthead]

Hmm, Prigozhin has had a public meltdown and publicly accused Shoigu and Gerasimov of refusing to resupply his forces and starving them of weapons and fuel. So that's going well.

[Jace, Extat]

3 minutes ago, Werthead said:

Hmm, Prigozhin has had a public meltdown and publicly accused Shoigu and Gerasimov of refusing to resupply his forces and starving them of weapons and fuel. So that's going well.

Welp, that's end-stage fascism/thugism for ya

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

3 minutes ago, Werthead said:

Hmm, Prigozhin has had a public meltdown and publicly accused Shoigu and Gerasimov of refusing to resupply his forces and starving them of weapons and fuel. So that's going well.

Has his defenestration been scheduled?

[Makk]

It seems quite possible that Ukraine now has and is using longer range missiles. There was a very large explosion at a Russian base in Mariupol. It is possible it was sabotage but those reporting, including a Russian source, believe it was a missile.

 

 

[Wilbur]

Meanwhile the Russian ICBMs are not working as intended...

US believes Russia had failed intercontinental ballistic missile test while Biden was in Ukraine | CNN Politics

[ThinkerX]

4 hours ago, Wilbur said:

Meanwhile the Russian ICBMs are not working as intended...

US believes Russia had failed intercontinental ballistic missile test while Biden was in Ukraine | CNN Politics

ICBM's and the nukes they carry require a degree of upkeep to remain operational. Russia may no longer be capable of that degree of upkeep.

 

 

[maarsen]

7 hours ago, ThinkerX said:

ICBM's and the nukes they carry require a degree of upkeep to remain operational. Russia may no longer be capable of that degree of upkeep.

 

 

Wasn't that obvious after the collapse of the Soviet Union? Inspectors were being offered missile parts in exchange for vodka. If anything I suspect that the going price for missile bits has dropped now.

[Werthead]

One of those weeks where a ton of stuff happened but none of it really added up to much. China and Russia reaffirmed their partnership and mildly castigated the United States, the United States reiterated its support for Ukraine and NATO, and Russia repeated its non-peer-reviewed historical grievances. So lots of news coverage and nothing materially really changed. Russia even withdrew from a nuclear test treaty whilst simultaneously still using its systems.

[Zorral]

A lesson for us in the USA about the warmongering being done by the maggotfactions such as mtg who are calling for civil war, though we won't heed it

Russia, One Year After the Invasion of Ukraine
Last winter, my friends in Moscow doubted that Putin would start a war. But now, as one told me, “the country has undergone a moral catastrophe.

Quote

 ... Kolya said that he worried about outright censorship, but also about self-censorship. He told me about journalists who had left the field. One had gone to work in communications for a large bank. Another was now working on elections—“and not in a good way.” The noose was tightening, and yet no one thought there’d be a war.

Quote

...  Alexander Baunov calls what happened in February of last year a putsch—the capture of the state by a clique bent on its own imperial projects and survival. “Just because the people carrying it out are the ones in power, does not make it less of a putsch,” Baunov told me recently. “There was no demand for this in Russian society.” ...

https://www.newyorker.com/news/essay/russia-one-year-after-the-invasion-of-ukraine