Ukraine and the Russian invasion, 2022-25

[Pickman's model]

Transnistria is already basically occupied by Russian military with a friendly pro-Russia government.

Moldovan population without Transnistria is less than 2 million people. Ukraine's pre-war population was 41 million. Ukraine's area is also around 18x the size of Moldova. Similar situation with the Baltic States being relatively tiny both in size and population.

Also it isn't really just Russia is it? China is pretending to be neutral but you can get bet they had a hand in getting North Korea to send troops. If Russia wins in Ukraine you can bet on more open and brazen Chinese support for Russian rearmament as they become less dependent on trade with western countries.

I said earlier in the thread some people are stuck viewing the world through the paradigm of the Iraq War era and the US unipolar moment. But that was 20 years ago and the world was very different then - China's total GDP size had only just overtaken Italy's in 2003. We are already in a multipolar world. Russia having the confidence for all out war with Ukraine would have been unthinkable 20 years ago and the rise of China is the main reason why.

An attack on the Baltics or Moldova, and a Bosnian crisis (probably spreading to Kosovo) manufactured by Putin ally and Republika Srpska President Milorad Dodik is also likely shortly after Russian victory in Ukraine. Baltic states is the least likely of all these and will probably come last, but if NATO reaches a point where Putin feels it is unlikely to enforce article 5 then he will seek to prove that NATO is over as this would finally restore Russian hegemony over Eastern Europe after a 4 decade interregnum.

This won't happen immediately after Russian victory but it won't be more than a decade down the line either. Letting Putin win in Ukraine will not bring peace.

That's a load of auld bollocks, strawmen eg letting putin win in Ukraine will not bring peace. Goal post moving eg not just Russia. Dull assertion eg an attack on the baltics likely. Contradiction eg an attack on baltics likely er no it it's not. Perhaps you shouldn't post in the wee small hours

 

[Rimbaud]

That's a load of auld bollocks, strawmen eg letting putin win in Ukraine will not bring peace. Goal post moving eg not just Russia. Dull assertion eg an attack on the baltics likely. Contradiction eg an attack on baltics likely er no it it's not. Perhaps you shouldn't post in the wee small hours

I'm posting in the wee small hours because I got back from Taiwan less than 2 days before, so I'm jetlagged still.

Your counterargument isn't really convincing.

 

[Pickman's model]

I'm posting in the wee small hours because I got back from Taiwan less than 2 days before, so I'm jetlagged still.

Your counterargument isn't really convincing.

I'm not making a counterargument as there's fuck all argument in your post to counter, it's a tissue of phallacies

 

[Rimbaud]

I'm not making a counterargument as there's fuck all argument in your post to counter, it's a tissue of phallacies

The thrust of your argument was that Russia is incapable of conquering or attacking Moldova or any of the Baltic States.

My counter argument was that these countries are comparatively tiny and in the case of Moldova also militarily far weaker and 20% of the population is already effectively occupied by Russia, and also that Russia's alliance with China will allow it to recover military strength quicker than you expect.

Certainly something to counter there, and you haven't really countered any of it beyond ad hominems and bluster about supposedly moving goalposts.

 

[Pickman's model]

The thrust of your argument was that Russia is incapable of conquering or attacking Moldova or any of the Baltic States.

My counter argument was that these countries are comparatively tiny and in the case of Moldova also militarily far weaker and 20% of the population is already effectively occupied by Russia, and also that Russia's alliance with China will allow it to recover military strength quicker than you expect.

Certainly something to counter there, and you haven't really countered any of it beyond ad hominems and bluster about supposedly moving goalposts.

Oh I have. Only either you've not read it or you haven't understood it. Take counterinsurgency for example. You've not addressed the point I made on that. You're blithely saying China will help Russia recover military strength. You dont say how, almost certainly by supplying parts, dual use technology or weapons I suppose you had in mind.

but it's not things but trained soldiers Russia will be short of. Soldiers trained not in assaulting enemy positions but in fighting wars among the people, in which the population, not territory, is the prize. You're blithely saying Moldova is militarily weaker. Yeh. It doesn't have the big battalions. But you don't need many people for an insurgency, as we have seen in the six counties.

And it does have distance between itself and moscow. You're reluctant to explain how troops and supplies will move to Transnistria/Moldova other than through Ukraine. And from my pov it's definitely on the cards for there to be an insurgency in Ukraine after any cessation of major operations in the country, if events fall out as we expect.

 

[DownwardDog]

The thrust of your argument was that Russia is incapable of conquering or attacking Moldova or any of the Baltic States.

My counter argument was that these countries are comparatively tiny and in the case of Moldova also militarily far weaker and 20% of the population is already effectively occupied by Russia, and also that Russia's alliance with China will allow it to recover military strength quicker than you expect.

Certainly something to counter there, and you haven't really countered any of it beyond ad hominems and bluster about supposedly moving goalposts.

In the whole of 2024 the net territorial gain of the Russian Federation is about 1,700km2 (the same area as Worcestershire). If they are going all the way to the Baltic, it's going to take them a while.

 

[Chz]

In the whole of 2024 the net territorial gain of the Russian Federation is about 1,700km2 (the same area as Worcestershire). If they are going all the way to the Baltic, it's going to take them a while.

That's the only bright spot in the doom and gloom of the slow Russian advance. They don't have the tools in the numbers they need to punch through, so if there is no peace deal it's going to take them until 2035 to get to Kyiv. One side or the other will pack it in before then. Heck, Putin might just die and whoever is next loses the appetite for this insanity. This is why the Ukrainians fight on - it's not completely hopeless.

 

[teqniq]

Maybe they are hoping he's KIA or maybe it's the manpower shortage and they just don't give a fuck anyway:

Russian Blogger-Soldier Accused of Child Sex Abuse Returns to Army Ranks

A Russian military blogger facing allegations of assaulting an 11-year-old girl has been permitted to remain free while awaiting trial.

united24media.com

 

[ska invita]

That's the only bright spot in the doom and gloom of the slow Russian advance. They don't have the tools in the numbers they need to punch through, so if there is no peace deal it's going to take them until 2035 to get to Kyiv. One side or the other will pack it in before then. Heck, Putin might just die and whoever is next loses the appetite for this insanity. This is why the Ukrainians fight on - it's not completely hopeless.

Ukraine is not fighting on, its over: Zelensky says Ukraine "must do everything so that this war ends next year, ends through diplomatic means".

Wishing that a single individual might drop dead is not a rational basis on which to fight wars, or cheer on from the comfort of your own home. Who is dropping dead are hundreds and thousands of innocent people, from both sides. And for what? Nothing has changed in two years now. Still, carry on chaps, Putin might fall over and then his replacement might think fuck it lets give up.

 

[The39thStep]

Poll in ZN-UA on imaginary elections . Firstly there are no conformed candidates , secondly, we have no idea when elections would be held, if they can be held, or who would be allowed to vote however this is what the poll says :



Intersting footnote: The sociological study was conducted by the Social Monitoring Center on behalf of American Political Services using telephone interviews among 1,200 respondents. The study was conducted from November 15 to 21, 2024. The probability of survey error is 1.8-2.9%.




You'll need Goggle translate Залужный победит на выборах президента независимо от конкурентов - социсследование

 

[ska invita]

Zaluzhny took the lead some time ago...hence him getting fired, it was said

 

[Chz]

Ukraine is not fighting on, its over: Zelensky says Ukraine "must do everything so that this war ends next year, ends through diplomatic means".

Wishing that a single individual might drop dead is not a rational basis on which to fight wars, or cheer on from the comfort of your own home. Who is dropping dead are hundreds and thousands of innocent people, from both sides. And for what? Nothing has changed in two years now. Still, carry on chaps, Putin might fall over and then his replacement might think fuck it lets give up.

Except they're still fighting. That's a bit of a flaw in your statement, isn't it?
They would love to stop fighting, but they're not going to just agree to anything. If Russia doesn't table anything acceptable they will fight on. If the price of peace is a pro-Kremlin regime installed along with demilitarisation, I'll bet you 50p right now the fighting doesn't stop. As posted above, only 25% of Ukrainians think they should cede any territory. Which is an... optimistic take on the situation, I agree. But that's the state of it.

Suggesting that the only reason to fight is that Putin might die is a gross misrepresentation of the post you quoted. The reason they fight is to stop Russians from taking all of their land, deporting anyone who speaks Ukrainian in public to Siberia and stealing their children to be raised Russian.

 

[The39thStep]

Quite a remarkable statement, in my view, from the President of the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development that despite power shortages in Ukraine due to Russian missile and drone attacks it will not fund Ukraine’s largest private energy company, DTEK. This is due to DTEK being owned by the richest man in Ukraine.

"The goal of freeing the economy from the influence of oligarchs is absolutely essential, and we have very firm ideas on this: it is part of the reforms that must be made for Ukraine to join the European Union. If we accepted compromises on this issue, we would harm the country's long-term prospects," Odile Renaud-Basso said.

DTEK has said it has suffered losses from Russia estimated at over two-thirds of its electricity generation capacity from renewables and a third of its thermal capacity. The Kyiv Independent reported in June that in a worst-case scenario, Ukrainians could face up to 20 hours of blackouts a day.

https://archive.ph/mA3sh

Ukrainian energy giant says it's 'disappointed' by report on EBRD's refusal to fund it

The statement is a response to an article published by the Italian newspaper Corriere della Sera. The newspaper reported on Nov. 24 that Odile Renaud-Basso, the president of the EBRD, had said the bank would not provide funds to DTEK due to its ownership by oligarch Rinat Akhmetov.

kyivindependent.com

 

[ska invita]

Quite a remarkable statement, in my view, from the President of the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development that despite power shortages in Ukraine due to Russian missile and drone attacks it will not fund Ukraine’s largest private energy company, DTEK. This is due to DTEK being owned by the richest man in Ukraine.

"The goal of freeing the economy from the influence of oligarchs is absolutely essential, and we have very firm ideas on this: it is part of the reforms that must be made for Ukraine to join the European Union. If we accepted compromises on this issue, we would harm the country's long-term prospects," Odile Renaud-Basso said.

DTEK has said it has suffered losses from Russia estimated at over two-thirds of its electricity generation capacity from renewables and a third of its thermal capacity. The Kyiv Independent reported in June that in a worst-case scenario, Ukrainians could face up to 20 hours of blackouts a day.

https://archive.ph/mA3sh

Ukrainian energy giant says it's 'disappointed' by report on EBRD's refusal to fund it

The statement is a response to an article published by the Italian newspaper Corriere della Sera. The newspaper reported on Nov. 24 that Odile Renaud-Basso, the president of the EBRD, had said the bank would not provide funds to DTEK due to its ownership by oligarch Rinat Akhmetov.

kyivindependent.com

can imagine selling it to a "friendly" non-Ukrainian company will be a precondition
??

 

[tim]

Unlike Pinner and Aslin who were at one time in Azov and the Georgian Legion respectively this bloke was/is in the Ukranian International Legion.

A bad week for British tourists: getting sunk in the Med, drinking lethal shots in Laos, and now this.

 

[TopCat]

• A senior official in Joe Biden’s administration has told the Associated Press that the US is urging Ukraine to quickly increase the size of its military by drafting more troops and lowering the conscription age to as young as 18. The official, speaking to the Associated Press on the condition of anonymity, said on Wednesday the outgoing Democratic administration wants Ukraine to lower the mobilisation age from 25 to help expand the pool of fighting age men available.

 

[CNT36]

• A senior official in Joe Biden’s administration has told the Associated Press that the US is urging Ukraine to quickly increase the size of its military by drafting more troops and lowering the conscription age to as young as 18. The official, speaking to the Associated Press on the condition of anonymity, said on Wednesday the outgoing Democratic administration wants Ukraine to lower the mobilisation age from 25 to help expand the pool of fighting age men available.

What a cunt.

 

[The39thStep]

• A senior official in Joe Biden’s administration has told the Associated Press that the US is urging Ukraine to quickly increase the size of its military by drafting more troops and lowering the conscription age to as young as 18. The official, speaking to the Associated Press on the condition of anonymity, said on Wednesday the outgoing Democratic administration wants Ukraine to lower the mobilisation age from 25 to help expand the pool of fighting age men available.

Ukraine hasn't exhausted its conscription from the over 25-year-old pool yet, in fact there are a couple of million plus just under a million not registered. The complaint from inside Ukraine is that the supply of equipment from 'allies' like the US comes in such fitful dribs and drabs doesn't help them accelerate effective deployment. Another issue is Ukraine's demographics and its future workforce in whatever form the Ukrainian state becomes and that 18- 24 year old category is pretty vital in that.

You get the sense that Zelensky and his government realise the creeping and understandable war weariness in some parts of the country. Whereas both the US and Germans have both made demands to lower the conscription age or like the Poles and Lithuanians called for the repatriation of refugees subject to conscription. Within Ukraine, the over enthusiastic efforts of TsiKa agents of Ukraine's military recruitment office have created a backlash in some areas. The new procedures on stop checks and patrols are allegedly to ensure that people’s details are up to date on the conscription database, however, there are allegations that men are abducted, taken to medicals, and then to military training and the front.

There has been a recent clampdown and prosecution of medical staff charging for exemptions for those who can afford it, legislation has changed so that exemptions are now reviewed every six months and most will be digitised and put onto a central database. Many of those who are conscripted and can afford it end up donating to regiments which have a decent track record of how they treat soldiers or who will offer them positions as drone operators. Charitable donations to military units by and large have fallen off this year, in some cases by 20%. The economic situation in parts of the rural south and east is extremely difficult with reports that some have made the arduous round trip through Belarus and then into Russia to resettle in the Donbass region in their old properties.

It's easy for those governments whose citizens aren't doing the fighting to be telling those who are what they should be doing, and the media and social media is full of such people who must feel let down that some Ukrainians aren't living up to their expectations of how to give it to the Russians.

 

[TopCat]

Politically, the west can’t even consider deploying their own troops if there are many, many Ukrainians avoiding the draft.

 

[teuchter]

Politically, the west can’t even consider deploying their own troops if there are many, many Ukrainians avoiding the draft.

We're not going to send our professional military, trained to do the job they chose as a career, until you've killed enough of your own untrained conscripts, who didn't choose to or want to fight?

 

[andysays]

We're not going to send our professional military, trained to do the job they chose as a career, until you've killed enough of your own untrained conscripts, who didn't choose to or want to fight?

I seem to remember you've come out with similar comments suggesting "our" military should be deployed in Ukraine before.

I don't imagine many of them signed up on the basis that they would be deployed to defend a non-NATO country, and I think it would be hugely politically unpopular* if US or UK troops were used in that way.

* except perhaps to gung-ho armchair warriors such as yourself with, as far as I'm aware, no history of military service.

 

[Pickman's model]

We're not going to send our professional military, trained to do the job they chose as a career, until you've killed enough of your own untrained conscripts, who didn't choose to or want to fight?

What, you think British troops with all the equipment to fight for perhaps 8 weeks ought to be deployed in Ukraine?

 

[DownwardDog]

I don't imagine many of them signed up on the basis that they would be deployed to defend a non-NATO country, and I think it would be hugely politically unpopular* if US or UK troops were used in that way.

I agree that there is not a single thing in Ukraine that's worth the bones of a British squaddie and it would be very unpopular.

However, and motivations vary, I don't think any recruit signs up on some sort of tacit understanding that they'll only have to fight and kill in defence of NATO signatories. It's made crystal clear, or was in my day, that you may be called on to do anything (within the vagaries of the law).

 

[LDC]

I agree that there is not a single thing in Ukraine that's worth the bones of a British squaddie and it would be very unpopular.

That's a very odd and narrowly nationalist thing to say and think. So there's nothing and nobody in Ukraine (or anywhere else?) worth risking British lives for? Do you think it's the same for everything like this... no level of solidarity or care for others you define as 'not British'? Is it just about war, or anything where there's a risk to British lives?

 

[teuchter]

I seem to remember you've come out with similar comments suggesting "our" military should be deployed in Ukraine before.

I don't imagine many of them signed up on the basis that they would be deployed to defend a non-NATO country, and I think it would be hugely politically unpopular* if US or UK troops were used in that way.

* except perhaps to gung-ho armchair warriors such as yourself with, as far as I'm aware, no history of military service.

I'm not suggesting anything "should" happen. Just commenting on the notion that the political acceptability of external military help might be determined by a perception of "draft dodgers" in whatever country is unfortunate enough to be under attack.

I'd say it's quite "armchair" to point at young men trying to avoid conscription as a reason to deem a particular country or area unworthy of international help.

 

[Pickman's model]

I'm not suggesting anything "should" happen. Just commenting on the notion that the political acceptability of external military help might be determined by a perception of "draft dodgers" in whatever country is unfortunate enough to be under attack.

I'd say it's quite "armchair" to point at young men trying to avoid conscription as a reason to deem a particular country or area unworthy of international help.

Ywstwy

 

[teuchter]

Ywstwy

But what do you think?

 

[Pickman's model]

But what do you think?

I think you're a puffed up windbag

 

[The39thStep]

This gave me the impression that Zelensky is addressing negotiations with Ukraine's 'allies' rather than anything related to the Russians?

Ukraine war: Zelensky says Nato membership could end 'hot phase'

But Zelensky points out no-one has yet made such an offer and whether Nato would consider a move is doubtful.

www.bbc.com

 

[ska invita]

This is what I've been saying for the last two years.... though I don't see why it has to be NATO per se, it could be defended by any coalition of willing countries.

Rather than take the advice of the head of the US army and have done this two years ago from a position deemed to be peak strength it is now being floated on the back foot and with Trump coming into power. More disastrous decision making cheered on by the right wing press and politicians here and elsewhere