Ukraine 31: Icarus Edition

[Werthead]

Russia losing the PR battle in Odesa was a huge own goal.

Russia has launched a counter-attack to recapture Urozhaine. They advanced a column of vehicles directly into a field of drone-directed artillery fire and lost the whole lot, so didn't even get close to the town. Feels like a very desperate gamble.

Lugovoi in Bryansk is under attack by the Freedom of Russia partisan group, possibly backed up by Ukrainian special forces. Appears to be a major raid, still ongoing.

An electricity substation in Belaya, Kursk Oblast was destroyed by Ukrainian drones overnight, plunging the village into darkness before they managed to effect emergency repairs. Possibly a warning that if Russia starts major attacks on Ukrainian energy infrastructure again, Ukraine can retaliate in kind.

Putin has asked Andrey Troshin, former commander of Wagner, to take command of the organisation again (or possibly reconstitute it into a new force) and return to the front line in Ukraine. Troshin did not exactly seem thrilled at the prospect.

[Werthead]

Unconfirmed reports that a Russian Shahed drone flew 21 kilometres into Romanian airspace and crashed near Galati. Quite a lot of videos on social media showing something on fire outside the town. Not picking up a huge amount of traction even on the more speculative channels though, so wait for more information.

[Werthead]

Looks like Russia has lost between 1,000 and 1,200 troops in attempts to recapture Klishchiivka over the past fortnight. Just massed attacks without artillery support on Ukrainian forces dug-in with heavy weapons in defence. Complete insanity.

[Bironic]

Could something like that be used today as a tactic to circumvent or destroy the large russian minefields and defensive lines? Or is it just too time consuming, ineffective and can fairly easy be detected by the enemy with things such as drones, ground penetrating radar, seismographs, satellites etc.?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tunnel_warfare (section modern warfare/ world war one)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mines_in_the_Battle_of_Messines_(1917)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_Tunnel_of_Aggression

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korean_Demilitarized_Zone  (section incursion tunnels)

Edited September 30, 2023 by Bironic

[Werthead]

40 minutes ago, Bironic said:

Could something like that be used today as a tactic to circumvent or destroy the large russian minefields and defensive lines? Or is it just too time consuming, ineffective and can fairly easy be detected by the enemy with things such as drones, ground penetrating radar, seismographs, satellites etc.?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tunnel_warfare (section modern warfare/ world war one)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mines_in_the_Battle_of_Messines_(1917)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_Tunnel_of_Aggression

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korean_Demilitarized_Zone  (section incursion tunnels)

I suspect all of the above. Tunnels are easy to detect due to heat run-off. To avoid that, you need to dig really deep, and of course that requires specialised equipment and a lot of time.

The Ukrainian fast system for dealing with minefields seems to be using thermal imaging cameras to detect mines at night by them giving off the heat they've absorbed during the day, and using mine-clearance artillery to destroy most of them, and then send in sappers to do the stragglers by hand. A potential big problem for Ukraine upcoming is that as it gets colder during the day, the mines will become much harder to detect with this system.

[Zorral]

Why MAGA Wants to Betray Ukraine

Quote

 

... Why, then, do MAGA politicians want to cut Ukraine off?

The answer is, unfortunately, obvious. Whatever Republican hard-liners may say, they want Putin to win. They view the Putin regime’s cruelty and repression as admirable features that America should emulate. They support a wannabe dictator at home and are sympathetic to actual dictators abroad.

So pay no attention to all those complaints about how much we’re spending in Ukraine. They aren’t justified by the actual cost of aid, and the people claiming to be worried about the cost don’t really care about the money. What they are, basically, is enemies of democracy, both abroad and at home.

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/10/02/opinion/columnists/maga-republicans-ukraine.html

 

[Bironic]

Can someone explain to me why the public in the USA seem to turn against further aid to Ukraine?

In Europe people that want to cut aid to Ukraine can roughly be grouped into 9 categories:

1. Pacifist groups: these can have a center left to extreme left leaning, or a strong religious bent: such as Jehovas witnesses, Quakers, but also other devout Christians or Religious persons might fall into this category, as well as the  part of the population that has suffered through wars, or the people that think that the main lesson of European history which is filled with wars is to follow the path of Diplomacy, Talks, rule of law, negotiations, international institutions & accords and Peace. These people generally are against the Russian invasion but they do think that sending weapons of any kind to Ukraine actually increases suffering and prolongs the war. There standpoint is understandeable even if mislead
2. Parts of the Center left to extreme left parties, labor unions, movements (these view Russia as the Successor of the Soviet Union and thus as the only country that stood up/stands up to American and Western Imperialism, Colonialism, Capitalism, Neoliberalism, Fascism, Nazism, Conservatism and Racism). These people have clearly no clue what Putin and his ideology is.
3. Soviet Nostalgics: Older people that lived in Soviet/Eastern bloc parts of Europe that remember the "good old days"(roughly 1945-1985) when housing was affordable, emigration was low, immigration was nonexistent, Oil (as well as Gas, Coal, Wood, Electricity, Metals) were cheap, everyone had a job, inflation was nonexistent, Crime and Violent Crime was low, the political scene was stable, populations grew, ethnic violence and wars were rare, pensions were paid at a young age, healthcare & education and culture was affordable, the gap between rich people and poor was fairly small, extreme poverty was rare, fear of social descent wasn't a thing, the bad guys were clear: the Americans/capitalists/fascists as were the good guys: the communists. The Warsaw pact/Comecon/Soviet Union/eastern bloc was a world power to behold. They as well as some of the younger ones also remember the period that followed(roughly 1985-2001) when wars were omnipresent, ethnic violence & rampant nationalism was massive, Organized Crime & criminality was huge, Corruption, extreme poverty, stark contrast between rich and poor, unemployment, inflation, emigration, social decay, human and natural disasters, political instability, exploding costs of living, deindustrialization, loss of meaning and loss of power dominated the political life.
4. Businessmen: Basically Europe had a fairly simple business deal: Russia (and before that the Soviet Union) gives us cheap natural resources (Oil, Gas, Coal, Peat, Wood, Electricity, Agricultural products, Fishing products, pelts, various Metals, various other natural resources such as Phosphate or Nitrate) which then makes a part of the Russian population rich or at least "middle class": these guys then buy western european industrial goods and luxury products (such as cars, airplanes, watches, fashion etc.) go for holidays in European countries and spend their money there (Cyprus, Greece, Bulgaria, Croatia, Albania, Montenegro, France, Italy, Spain, Switzerland, Austria etc.) put their savings and money into European financial institutes and invest it into European businesses (across Switzerland, Hungary, Austria, Germany, Italy, Spain, France, UK & dependencies, Netherlands, Ireland, Belgium, Luxemburg, Monaco, Liechtenstein, Ukraine etc.)
5. Working class & poor people: These generally are hugely affected that the costs of Oil, gas, coal, Uranium, Electricity, Agricultural products that came largely from Russia went through the roof across Europe largely because of the war. They also want the russians back as costumers and consumers so that their jobs and income are safe. They basically want the war to stop (or at the very least the sanctions gone) so that they can pay their bills. Standpoint understandable.
6. People that have just a general, vaguely defined Antiamericanism: This can be an actual opposition to War crimes such as the Iraq Invasion (and often indulge in some sort of Whataboutism) or just the fact that they don't like McDonalds & Captain America. 
7. People that fear the support for Ukraine might trigger Putin to "escalate" the war by blowing up the nuclear plant in saporisha, using a dirty bomb, Chemical weapons(Nowitchok/Sarin/Gas/etc.), nuclear weapons either in Ukraine or in uninhabited parts of russia or the international waters, or maybe into countries that don't have nuclear weapons of their own and/or are not protected by the american ones, all of that will then send radioactive fallout and toxins into the rest of Europe.  People that fear he might actually invade their country too if provoked.
8. People that are just fed up with the amount of Ukrainian and russian refugees and the "benefits" they get. People that fear that Russia will send even more refugees from allied or neighbouring countries such as Iran, Afghanistan, Syria, Libya, Africa etc.
9. Right wing extremists/fascists/Nazis/Authoritarians/Chauvinists/Jingoists/Racists/Reactionaries etc. they basically admire Putin and want him to win the war. they roughly make up 15-35 % of the population.

But if I look at the USA with the exception of the last point which is basically equal to European nations, none of the other points seem to matter very much. Sure americans have business interests but compared to the amount Europe traded with Russia it was little, the amount of russian tourists in US is/was negligible, sure there are left wing americans and Pacifists but they are way less numerous and powerful, there are almost no Soviet Nostalgics, USA didn't go through through the dissolution of the eastern bloc and the chaos that followed, Wars and genocide have not scarred the face of the USA, the US economy over all has fared better than the European one when you look at the last years, decades or even the 20th century over all, USA certainly doesn't need Russian oil, natural resources or agricultural products they have plenty of their own (or they can import them from their region such as canada, mexico or Latin America and the carribean). There aren't near as many refugees from Ukraine and Russia there and Russia can't threaten to send even more to the USA. There is a much greater support for the military, wars and power politics compared to the more soft power approach of Europe.

So why does the Support for Ukraine wane in the USA? And is there a chance that it will eventually stop (for example if Trump and/or the Republicans win in 2024)?

Edited October 3, 2023 by Bironic

[Kalbear]

10 minutes ago, Bironic said:

So why does the Support for Ukraine wane in the USA? And is there a chance that it will eventually stop (for example if Trump and/or the Republicans win in 2024)?

Support for Ukraine wanes because Trump and other conservative voices in the media want it to. It really is as simple as that. 

There are some more nuances to it - Ukraine is weirdly associated with Trump's first impeachment, with Hunter Biden and corruption, with bizarre conspiracy theories about biolabs, there's a LOT of successful misinformation from Russians about Ukraine out there - but the overall thing is that you have people wanting Ukraine to lose because Trump wants the war to be done and other far-right folks want Ukraine to lose.

There are some other folks who are weirdly afraid of global nuclear war (like Musk is) or don't want other escalations, or people who didn't say a peep about spending money on Iraq and Afghanistan who now are big on spending money on endless war (like mcbigski is), but almost all of that originates from Russian disinfo campaigns. 

And it absolutely can end in 2024. It almost certainly will unless Ukraine bribes Trump. 

[Maithanet]

10 minutes ago, Bironic said:

1. Right wing extremists/fascists/Nazis/Authoritarians/Chauvinists/Jingoists/Racists/Reactionaries etc. they basically admire Putin and want him to win the war. they roughly make up 15-35 % of the population.

But if I look at the USA with the exception of the last point which is basically equal to European nations, none of the other points seem to matter very much. Sure americans have business interests but compared to the amount Europe traded with Russia it was little, the amount of russian tourists in US is/was negligible, sure there are left wing americans and Pacifists but they are way less numerous and powerful, there are almost no Soviet Nostalgics, USA didn't go through through the dissolution of the eastern bloc and the chaos that followed, Wars and genocide have not scarred the face of the USA, the US economy over all has fared better than the European one when you look at the last years, decades or even the 20th century over all, USA certainly doesn't need Russian oil, natural resources or agricultural products they have plenty of their own (or they can import them from their region such as canada, mexico or Latin America and the carribean). There aren't near as many refugees from Ukraine and Russia there and Russia can't threaten to send even more to the USA. There is a much greater support for the military, wars and power politics compared to the more soft power approach of Europe.

So why does the Support for Ukraine wane in the USA? And is there a chance that it will eventually stop (for example if Trump and/or the Republicans win in 2024)?

There is a portion of the right wing in America that is pretty cozy with Putin's fascism because they want to establish something similar over here.  They have no problem with big nations bullying smaller nations, and wonder why the US isn't "getting better deals" on the international stage in spite of having the strongest military and plenty of nukes.  The fact that the US IS getting plenty of great deals is conveniently ignored.  

As for the second part, if Trump wins in 2024, yes I expect that Ukraine aid will end.  Trump has always been very pro-Russia, appreciates that they helped get him elected in 2016 and is very much hoping they assist him again in 2024. 

[Werthead]

Armenia has joined the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court, requiring them to arrest Putin should he visit the country.

Aeroflot is reporting an increase in the number of malfunctions, cancelled flights and mechanical failures in its civil aviation fleet.

Remarkably, Ukraine is to start easing economic protection plans put in place at the start of the invasion. Currency valuations are to recommence from next week, apparently thanks to international support stabilising fears of a collapse of the country.

A Cameroon freighter is picking up grain from an unspecified port in Ukraine, and one from the Marshall Islands is apparently right behind it. Five other ships seem to be using the new "grain corridor" unilaterally set up by Ukraine after Russia pulled out of the grain deal.

There's apparently a lot of politicking going on between the EU and Orban to bring him on board so Ukraine can begin EU accession talks and unlock the EU foreign aid budget for next year (which both require unanimity). Orban continues to play nice with Putin, but there may be some signs that he's willing to stand up a little more (being friends with Putin at a distance is one thing, but Orban does not appear keen to have Russian troops right on Hungary's border should Ukraine fall). Interesting to see if that's just wishful thinking on the EU's part or it goes somewhere.

Russian forces launched an assault on Marinka and were beaten back with significant losses. Some reports of Ukraine launching a series of artillery and drone strikes on Tavriya, which is interesting. Still on the southern front but off away on a SW tangent from Robotyne and NW of Tokmak. I doubt Ukraine has enough capacity to open a third sub-front in this area, but who knows.

Shoigu says there will be no further mobilisation beyond the normal annual conscription. Officially 130,000 conscripts have been added to the tally, but it's believed they are secretly looking to add around 300,000 to the roster. The penal battalion idea is also continuing, with freshly-mobilised criminal troops apparently already deployed around Bakhmut.

In one of the robust displays of support, the UK has said it will begin training Ukrainian soldiers inside Ukraine itself, despite this meaning deploying troops to an active war zone (where they could be killed in a conventional strike without triggering Article 5, technically). Some other Ukrainian partner countries are also considering doing the same thing.

Britain has floated the idea, individually and as part of a wider NATO-Europe defence strategy, that Ukraine's industrial base could be maintained and utilised after the war to help rearm all of Europe. Rebuilding a native defence capacity in Britain and France is impossible in the short-term and will take many, many years to become viable (possibly less so in Germany, which still maintains an industrial capacity). Ensuring Ukrainian victory and then maintaining Ukraine's wartime weapons output to supply its western partners is a very interesting idea as it will bolster the Ukrainian postwar economy.

Edited October 3, 2023 by Werthead

[Bironic]

27 minutes ago, Maithanet said:

There is a portion of the right wing in America that is pretty cozy with Putin's fascism because they want to establish something similar over here.  They have no problem with big nations bullying smaller nations, and wonder why the US isn't "getting better deals" on the international stage in spite of having the strongest military and plenty of nukes.  The fact that the US IS getting plenty of great deals is conveniently ignored.  

As for the second part, if Trump wins in 2024, yes I expect that Ukraine aid will end.  Trump has always been very pro-Russia, appreciates that they helped get him elected in 2016 and is very much hoping they assist him again in 2024. 

 

28 minutes ago, Kalnak the Magnificent said:

Support for Ukraine wanes because Trump and other conservative voices in the media want it to. It really is as simple as that. 

There are some more nuances to it - Ukraine is weirdly associated with Trump's first impeachment, with Hunter Biden and corruption, with bizarre conspiracy theories about biolabs, there's a LOT of successful misinformation from Russians about Ukraine out there - but the overall thing is that you have people wanting Ukraine to lose because Trump wants the war to be done and other far-right folks want Ukraine to lose.

There are some other folks who are weirdly afraid of global nuclear war (like Musk is) or don't want other escalations, or people who didn't say a peep about spending money on Iraq and Afghanistan who now are big on spending money on endless war (like mcbigski is), but almost all of that originates from Russian disinfo campaigns. 

And it absolutely can end in 2024. It almost certainly will unless Ukraine bribes Trump. 

https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/4208276-gop-senators-ask-biden-to-provide-ukraine-with-missiles-needed-to-win-war/

https://www.pravda.com.ua/eng/news/2023/06/9/7406196/

is there any chance that a coalition of Pro Ukrainian republicans and democrats would be able to "convince" / pressure a future president trump and his Maga republicans to extend aid to Ukraine?

[Kalbear]

9 minutes ago, Bironic said:

 

https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/4208276-gop-senators-ask-biden-to-provide-ukraine-with-missiles-needed-to-win-war/

https://www.pravda.com.ua/eng/news/2023/06/9/7406196/

is there any chance that a coalition of Pro Ukrainian republicans and democrats would be able to "convince" / pressure a future president trump and his Maga republicans to extend aid to Ukraine?

Pressure, maybe. Convince? Unlikely. Trump is both heavily indebted to Putin and is terrified of Russia. 

[ThinkerX]

1 hour ago, Kalnak the Magnificent said:

Pressure, maybe. Convince? Unlikely. Trump is both heavily indebted to Putin and is terrified of Russia. 

`Then again, Trump and his...accomplices...are so completely corrupt and incompetent, it *might* be possible to sneak sideways support for Ukraine past them. 'Humanitarian Assistance' or 'disposal of old ordinance' or some such. 

[Kalbear]

1 hour ago, ThinkerX said:

`Then again, Trump and his...accomplices...are so completely corrupt and incompetent, it *might* be possible to sneak sideways support for Ukraine past them. 'Humanitarian Assistance' or 'disposal of old ordinance' or some such. 

Trump, sure! Putin? Not a fucking chance in hell. 

[Zorral]

3 hours ago, Bironic said:

 

https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/4208276-gop-senators-ask-biden-to-provide-ukraine-with-missiles-needed-to-win-war/

https://www.pravda.com.ua/eng/news/2023/06/9/7406196/

is there any chance that a coalition of Pro Ukrainian republicans and democrats would be able to "convince" / pressure a future president trump and his Maga republicans to extend aid to Ukraine?

No.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

6 hours ago, Bironic said:

 

https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/4208276-gop-senators-ask-biden-to-provide-ukraine-with-missiles-needed-to-win-war/

https://www.pravda.com.ua/eng/news/2023/06/9/7406196/

is there any chance that a coalition of Pro Ukrainian republicans and democrats would be able to "convince" / pressure a future president trump and his Maga republicans to extend aid to Ukraine?

They want to punish Ukraine for not creating dirt on Biden for Trump.

[House Balstroko]

@Bironic

 

There is also a 10th category, albeit an offshoot of the 9th, in that right wing extremists are enamoured with the idea of a strong dictatorship stamping out the LGBTQ community. If Russia succeeds in Ukraine, then it emboldens their positions domestically. 
 

 

[Werthead]

Not too much going on today (or at least that's been reported), but Ukraine destroyed a complete S-400 complex in Belgorod, not just the launcher but a warhead and full radar support system as well. Russia is losing more S-400s than it can really afford, and it doesn't have a viable way of replacing them quickly. Also, the S-400 itself seems to be rather incapable of dealing with Ukrainian drones and missiles, which is a major problem for Russia's primary anti-air defence system (the S-500 is more or less operational, but there's only a couple of ready units, both defending Moscow, and no ability or budget to scale up production). 

[Maithanet]

Approximately how many S-400 systems does Russia have?  I thought they were relatively thin on the ground, but I feel like we've heard about a handful of them destroyed just in the past few months. 

[Werthead]

4 minutes ago, Maithanet said:

Approximately how many S-400 systems does Russia have?  I thought they were relatively thin on the ground, but I feel like we've heard about a handful of them destroyed just in the past few months. 

Over 400 erector-launchers, but they've never confirmed how many accompanying radar systems they have (except they seem to be significantly rarer, with each radar usually tied into multiple launchers). They're also being coy about how many have been destroyed, and Ukraine seem to have taken some out without making too much of a fuss about it. The estimates are all over the place (also some claimed S-400 losses turned out to be S-300s on further inspection).

The S-400 has always been looked at askance by western countries, who saw it as an upgraded S-300: fine, with a reasonably tasty range, but hardly earth-shattering. The Chinese also don't seem to have been too impressed, they ordered a load from Russia but paused after receiving and test-firing just two. The Chinese seem to be rating their own AA systems as superior (they recently sold some to Serbia; hopefully they don't get a chance to see how good they are versus western aircraft soon).