Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Ukraine and the Russian invasion, 2022-24

Spymaster said:
Again, not quite the point. We've been led to believe that this kind of information isn't getting through to ordinary Russians because Putin has total control of the media.
Click to expand...

He has control of state owned Russian media, he's trying to silence independent Russian media, he doesn't control the internet nor international broadcasters, via traditional cross-border radio, or TV via satellite transmission.
 
teuchter said:
It's been a few pages now since anyone's posted a statement from an obscure anarcho communist group. If Putin is starting to talk about nuclear weapons then we really need some stepping up in the quantity of statements from such groups.
Click to expand...

Not a statement really but the home page for a resistance committee.

medium.com

THE RESISTANCE COMMITTEE (ENG)

Anti-authoritarian forces organized their own international detachment within the framework of the Territorial Defense of Ukraine. Inâ¦
medium.com medium.com
 
bimble said:
Don't be cross. You just said you think Putin will go and someone more good at wars will take over and Russia will carry on its assault on Ukraine under this new leader. Let's see.
Click to expand...
No, i didn't say that. I took your piffle about Putin having an accident and magically Russia leaves and played with it. Let me be clear - I think that Putin will stay for some time yet, if anyone goes it'll be in the army leadership.
 
bimble said:
Why on earth would you think that Putin, sat at his end of the mad long table, would have the same understanding of things as that analyst "who says what the Kremlin doesn’t want to hear"?
You can't predict Putins actions from some piece of writing by a man who says 'Armed conflict with Ukraine now fundamentally doesn’t meet Russia’s national interests'.
Click to expand...

Predictions that he would use a nuclear weapon after just a few days are utter bullshit, even if there have been setbacks. Setbacks are a normal part of war and even if the war plan included optimistic scenarios with very short timescales, planning isnt done on the basis that those optimistic scenarios are sure to come to fruition. And if things go pear-shaped, you dont reach straight for a nuclear weapon. You try the next stage of the plan, eg using conventional weaponry and more troops.

So far Russia hasnt even completely pounded the utter hell out of Ukraine in the ways we've seen with 'shock and awe' from the USA etc in the past. They probably dont have the capabilities to do that in quite the same way the USA do, and they havent achieved utter dominance of the air, but they certainly have more conventional capabilities than have been deployed so far. We are told that they probably havent used some of them very much in cities because they fear that would get in the way of their later objectives to get Ukraine back within their sphere of influence. So they arent going to suddenly undermine those objectives to a staggeringly greater extent by chucking nuclear weapons at Ukraine.

We've already discussed in recent days how hard it is to assess the true extent of setbacks in Russias efforts, and how big the ramifications of such setbacks really are. It looks like there have been some setbacks but determining their significance requires us to look beyond the crude propaganda aspects, not take that stuff and run a ridiculous distance with it, all the way to absurd nuclear extents. The sort of shit you are coming out with requires us to at least have some sense of how long military operations in Ukraine would have to go on for before being seen as a failure. I mentioned several times that one well placed Russian said they were told to expect the main part of the operation to last 2 weeks. So I dont feel like placing all that much emphasis on the opening days of the war.

Its completely understandable that each day Kyiv doesnt fall and the government remains in place is treated as a victory of its own. But one that I suspect for many people is tinged with the expectation that the situation could change at any moment. The expectation remains that Russia will gain ground, they will achieve more results, even if the outcome after any initial victories could still be very messy. There is always the chance that either side could capitulate in one or more areas, that some uneasy deal from a position of weakness could emerge. That sort of conclusion, especially if room for both parties to save some face is allowed, is always far more likely than nuclear weapons being used. No matter the question, nuclear weapons are the wrong answer, and indeed a big part of their function ended up being to sit there as the obvious wrong answer which ultimately forces people and regimes to come up with other answers instead.
 
cupid_stunt said:
He has control of state owned Russian media, he's trying to silence independent Russian media, he doesn't control the internet nor international broadcasters, via traditional cross-border radio, or TV via satellite transmission.
Click to expand...

And on that note, it'll interesting to see what happens to RT in the UK, whilst OFCOM issues their UK licence to be on various platforms, like Sky & Freesat, the actual transmissions are from Luxembourg owned & operated satellites, which I suspect they use as their feed for Freeview, Virgin, etc.

So, as the EU is banning RT, that could save OFCOM from even getting involved.
 
elbows said:
Predictions that he would use a nuclear weapon after just a few days are utter bullshit, even if there have been setbacks. Setbacks are a normal part of war and even if the war plan included optimistic scenarios with very short timescales, planning isnt done on the basis that those optimistic scenarios are sure to come to fruition. And if things go pear-shaped, you dont reach straight for a nuclear weapon. You try the next stage of the plan, eg using conventional weaponry and more troops.

So far Russia hasnt even completely pounded the utter hell out of Ukraine in the ways we've seen with 'shock and awe' from the USA etc in the past. They probably dont have the capabilities to do that in quite the same way the USA do, and they havent achieved utter dominance of the air, but they certainly have more conventional capabilities than have been deployed so far. We are told that they probably havent used some of them very much in cities because they fear that would get in the way of their later objectives to get Ukraine back within their sphere of influence. So they arent going to suddenly undermine those objectives to a staggeringly greater extent by chucking nuclear weapons at Ukraine.

We've already discussed in recent days how hard it is to assess the true extent of setbacks in Russias efforts, and how big the ramifications of such setbacks really are. It looks like there have been some setbacks but determining their significance requires us to look beynd the crude propaganda aspects, not take that stuff and run a ridiculous distance with it, all the way to absurd nuclear extents. The sort of shit you are coming out with requires us to at least have some sense of how long military operations in Ukraine would have to go on for before being seen as a failure. I mentioned several times that one well placed Russian said they were told to expect the main part of the operation to last 2 weeks. So I dont feel like placing all that much emphasis on the opening days of the war.

Its completely understandable that each day Kyiv doesnt fall and the government remains in place is treated as a victory of its own. But one that I suspect for many people is tinged with the expectation that the situation could change at any moment. The expectation remains that Russia will gain ground, they will achieve more results, even if the outcome after any initial victories could still be very messy. There is always the chance that either side could capitulate in one or more areas, that some uneasy deal from a position of weakness could emerge. That sort of conclusion, especially if room for both parties to save some face is allowed, is always far more likely than nuclear weapons being used. No matter the question, nuclear weapons are the wrong answer, and indeed a big part of their function is to sit there as the obvious wrong answer which ultimately forces people and regimes to come up with other answers instead.
Click to expand...
This is very long and doesn’t answer my question. Idk what you mean by ‘the sort of shit you’re coming out with’ you’ll have to be more specific.
 
Spymaster said:
Not quite the point though is it? We're told that Putin controls the media and information flows and that the people of Russia don't actually know what's going on. However, somehow the information that thousands of Russian troops are dying is getting through to Russians in Russia when it's not even being reported here.
Click to expand...

It seems to be a significant part of the official Ukrainian twitter output. And presumably other social media that I don't see.

eta:
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

platinumsage
Ukraine and the Russian invasion, Feb 2022 - tangentially related crap
29 30 31 32 33
Replies
978
Views
52K
The39thStep
The39thStep
tim
The 2023 Russian Coup.
51 52 53 54 55
Replies
2K
Views
69K
_Russ_
_Russ_
Dogsauce
The Russian defenestration thread
2
Replies
51
Views
5K
maomao
maomao
platinumsage
Ukraine invasion memes and viral content
70 71 72 73 74
Replies
2K
Views
122K
The39thStep
The39thStep
Pickman's model
Ukraine after the war
2 3
Replies
62
Views
6K
phildwyer
phildwyer
Back
Top Bottom