Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Ukraine and the Russian invasion, 2022-24

or, the shahed has proven to be incredibly cheap and effective and so is being used more.

Potentially. You give no evidence for it, though, so what are you basing this on?

the data, which as it is given in your graphics in percentages does not allow the conclusions you draw to be sustained. it would be useful to know the actual numbers which might speak more strongly to the claims you make. the number of alcm might be constant but the use of iranian drones increased for example. yeh the percents look one way but this is a time when the hard numbers would offer greater clarity to support your case

True. I'll see if any figures are available. I did have a brief look but couldn't find anything.
 
yeh. the cost to ukraine of shooting down an iranian drone is almost certainly more than its value. so why not use more, the russians doubtless argue. depleting ukraine's ammunition and missiles through greater use of cheap drones seems like a win from moscow.
Shooting down drones is incredibly cheap. This I do know. They use Gepards, which are 1970s AA guns, previously thought obsolete. The ammunition is pennies.

Shaheds cost somewhere between $20,000 and $60,000 each.

Gepards can't take down cruise missiles. You need fancy AA for those, like Patriots, which are very expensive.
 
Shooting down drones is incredibly cheap. This I do know. They use Gepards, which are 1970s AA guns, previously thought obsolete. The ammunition is pennies.

Shaheds cost somewhere between $20,000 and $60,000 each.

Gepards can't take down cruise missiles. You need fancy AA for those, like Patriots, which are very expensive.
thank you for your correction
 
Shooting down drones is incredibly cheap. This I do know. They use Gepards, which are 1970s AA guns, previously thought obsolete. The ammunition is pennies.

Shaheds cost somewhere between $20,000 and $60,000 each.

Gepards can't take down cruise missiles. You need fancy AA for those, like Patriots, which are very expensive.
if none of them have been destroyed there are 52 gepards in ukraine. i dunno if thats a lot or not but it does seem a lot of frontline and cities to cover for that many.
 
You need fancy AA for those, like Patriots, which are very expensive.
and slow to produce. something like six hundred a year. which im sure ukraine could go through quite quick.
side note, i heard, and i don't know how true it is but only ten thousand of the missiles have been produced in total.
 
I see that on the Russia side, not noticed it on the Ukraine side. Myself and others claim that continuing to exist and an independent country is a victory of sorts, if that is what you mean?

If this war comes to an end it will be with something both sides can try and claim as a victory.
I do think there are more subtle ( and progressive) positions than just two sides of the ruling classes, Ukraine or Russia, and it's a great pity many of those who hold those views don't post on the thread anymore.
As for your view that continuing to exist and an independent country is a victory of sorts, I agree. I'm not sure what you were referring to when you said 'if is that what you mean?'
 
The full measures agreed in the Verkhovna Rada regarding mobilisation

The list of civil servants who have the right to postpone conscription for military service during mobilization is a fascinating read in itself

(You'll need translate on your browser as the English version of an article on the subject is different from the Ukrainian one with all the details)

 
Shaheds cost somewhere between $20,000 and $60,000 each.

Gepards can't take down cruise missiles. You need fancy AA for those, like Patriots, which are very expensive.
Someone found the contract for shaheds from Iran and they were paying something like 150,000 each, much higher than the estimate. I guess Iran saw an opportunity. Also being paid in gold due to difficulties with currency transfer.

The basic cruise missiles have been brought down with all kinds of stuff, including AA guns. Patriot is needed for ballistic missiles, cruise missiles can be brought down the same way aircraft are (manpads, AA gun etc.)

What Ukraine doesn’t have much chance with is the air defence missiles used in ground attack mode, these move very quickly and have been widely used against cities near the front like Kharkiv and Odesa. From launch they’re at target in a couple of minutes, barely a chance to detect. It’s insane that Ukraine isn’t allowed to strike back at launch sites over the border in Russia with western-supplied missiles, like they’ve been given help but have one arm tied behind their back.
 
How would you define the West, and how would that definition exclude contemporary Russia? Is "the West" a political, cultural, or just a geographical concept? Do you see it as a cluster of nation states, if so what criteria grant entry to that cluster? Is it the USA?

I
not got the time or energy to get involved in a conversation on this but this map is about right
Clash_of_Civilizations_mapn2.png
 
not got the time or energy to get involved in a conversation on this but this map is about right
Clash_of_Civilizations_mapn2.png
Pretty arbitrary to say Finland, Poland, Hungary and Croatia are western but EU members Romania (speakers of a Latin rather than Slavic language), Greece (founder of western civilisation isn't western?) and Bulgaria aren't.

If your basing this on religion then surely some Latin American countries with larger percentage of people of European descent are as western as the US is as well.
 
not got the time or energy to get involved in a conversation on this but this map is about right
Clash_of_Civilizations_mapn2.png
A more relevant way of looking at it would be either Cold War era divisions OR European Colonial Empires. The latter consists of UK, France, Belgium, Netherlands, Denmark, Sweden, Spain, Portugal, Italy, Germany, Turkey, and of course Russia, the only European Empire which continues to hold territory it took from the Qing Empire (and from Japan).

The reason we don't see Russia in this light quite as much is that the Soviet Union presented itself as a different kind of Empire, entering the world at a time when the world was still divided up by European Empires, but became anachronistic as European colonies gained independence. Nevertheless it is still part of this history and the root cause of the Ukrainian war is Russian sense of entitlement to their colonial possessions and failure to come to terms with the loss of Empire in the same way that other European states have.
 
Last edited:
Pretty arbitrary to say Finland, Poland, Hungary and Croatia are western but EU members Romania (speakers of a Latin rather than Slavic language), Greece (founder of western civilisation isn't western?) and Bulgaria aren't.

If your basing this on religion then surely some Latin American countries with larger percentage of people of European descent are as western as the US is as well.

It's a weird map indeed - apparently Greece and Japan aren't part of the West but Papua New Guinea and selected parts of the Philippines are.
 
Do your own research
not got the time or energy to get involved in a conversation on this but this map is about right
Clash_of_Civilizations_mapn2.png


This is a version of Samuel Huntington's bizzare confessional division of the World. Latin America gets a special category, because although it is predominantly Catholic, Huntingdon didn't want to alienate the Latino hating racists who might otherwise buy his book.

I assumed he was dead and long forgotten. It doesn't really address the high degree to which Russia was integrated into the "Western" economic or financial systems.

Presumably much of the Caribbean is missing because it is too anglophone not to be part of this version of the "West", but to black for either Huntingdon or the cartographer to want to include it
 
Peace talk statement from the Russians. Build on the instanbul talks. But take into account realities on the ground. Refusal to pick this up and run with it could cause those realities to be more daunting in a year.
The Kremlin said on Friday that a draft Russia-Ukraine agreement negotiated in 2022 could serve as a starting point for prospective talks to end the fighting that has dragged into a third year.

Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov said that the draft document that was discussed in Istanbul in March 2022 could be “the basis for starting negotiations.” At the same time, he said that the possible future talks would need to take into account the “new realities”.

“There have been many changes since then, new entities have been included in our constitution,” Peskov said in a conference call with reporters.

In September 2022, Russia annexed four Ukrainian regions in a move that Kyiv and its western allies have rejected as an unlawful.

Peskov’s statement followed Russian president Vladimir Putin’s comments on Thursday, in which he mocked prospective Ukraine peace talks that Switzerland is set to host in June, warning that Moscow will not accept any enforced peace plans.
 
Back
Top Bottom