So, would I be right in guessing that Putin basically used the oil wealth to create a loyal inner circle who are enriched by it?
Ukraine and the Russian invasion, 2022-25
- Thread starter kebabking
- Start date
So, would I be right in guessing that Putin basically used the oil wealth to create a loyal inner circle who are enriched by it?
Spymaster
Plastic Paddy
No. Which is why I was baffled when you brought it up.
kebabking
Not a Girly Swot, but I like them....
I don't know - it's worked before, so it seems odd to walk away from a successful tactic.
Maybe hubris, pride, or perhaps a feeling of running out of time...?
planetgeli
There's no future in England's dreaming
Because at some point delusions of grandeur took over him. I too expected the same as kebabking. But I don't go with the prevailing notion here that he didn't think it would be hard to take Ukraine. Everything I've read from commentators in the last 3-4 years said it would be extremely hard. I cannot believe Putin hasn't read the same things. But at some point this empire thing became uppermost in his mind as doable. Not easy, but doable over an extended period - and if Ukraine went well, who knows? Further. And the more you spiral down that powerful path, the further you get from the ability to make rational, correct decisions and plans.
cupid_stunt
Happy New Year!
The idea that logistical vehicles are held up by broken down vehicles, because they haven't got a towing capacity, appeals to my sense of humour.
Perhaps they need help from a couple of Ukrainian farmers?
Rimbaud
Basically yes. I recommend Catherine Belton's book Putin's People for the story of how Putin and his KGB entourage relentlessly seized control of private companies, took over the economy, siphoned billions, blurred the lines between organised crime and political power, shut down their opponents and then used their riches and power to extend influence in the West.
The one good thing to come out of this tragic war is that the West might finally get serious about cracking down on the oligarchs and all their ill gotten gains being laundered in the City of London. If enough of their assets are frozen they might decide that Putin is a liability and move against him.
Basically yes. I recommend Catherine Belton's book Putin's People for the story of how Putin and his KGB entourage relentlessly seized control of private companies, took over the economy, siphoned billions, blurred the lines between organised crime and political power, shut down their opponents and then used their riches and power to extend influence in the West.
The one good thing to come out of this tragic war is that the West might finally get serious about cracking down on the oligarchs and all their ill gotten gains being laundered in the City of London. If enough of their assets are frozen they might decide that Putin is a liability and move against him.
DaveCinzano
WATCH OUT, GEORGE, HE'S GOT A SCREWDRIVER!
Would be funny if this actually revealed something we're not supposed to know yet:
Esp. the move into Moldova
gosub
~#
Unless they've got swimming tanks they've got some construction to do first
bimble
floofy
its absolutely impossible for me to tell whats going on with that, claims and counter claims hundreds of tweets in the last hour, saying the countries definitely aren't sending fighter jets and that they are. i have no clue.
there's this but its probably out of date already.
Last edited:
Spymaster
Plastic Paddy
I think these reports are likely nonsense. If they're true, I wouldn't want to be in those bloke's shoes when Russia takes Kiev and catches up with them.
spitfire
Walty McWaltface
Re. free MIGS etc.
As platinumsage posted earlier It appears to be from a poor translation by a politico journo. The EU person was trying to explain that no jets would be flying based from EU bases, not that they wouldn't be going to Ukraine.
Looks like they have clarified the nuance in this later article.
www.politico.com
It's very confusing but I think they're on the way soon.
As platinumsage posted earlier It appears to be from a poor translation by a politico journo. The EU person was trying to explain that no jets would be flying based from EU bases, not that they wouldn't be going to Ukraine.
Looks like they have clarified the nuance in this later article.
European plan to donate fighter jets to Ukraine collapses
The dissolution of the deal comes as European countries lined up Monday to announce new weapons packages for Ukraine, from anti-armor and anti-air rockets to artillery and medical supplies.
www.politico.com
It's very confusing but I think they're on the way soon.
elbows
Well-Known Member
OK so you were mostly arguing with me because you hadnt read the same parts of the thread that I had before having this conversation, but also because when we strip away that confusion we are still disagreeing about a fundamental point as far as I can tell:
Countries are still prepared to give planes to Ukraine because you are wrong about how such acts are perceived by Russia compared to other the implications of stuff like no fly zones. There is a very clear difference between these things, in terms of which ones are commonly understood to cross the sort of red lines that come with mutually assured destruction. And in the MAD environment its pretty important that such understandings are shared by both sides far in advance, so that a very real threat of nuclear war is not stumbled into by accident. Which doesnt mean mistakes cannot possibly happen in that way, or that it is impossible for a country to decide that actually they'd like to draw a new red line and alert people to their new stance, although if they do that then they have to give their opponents time to take this new red line into account in future, they dont apply it retrospectively or else we all go boom. In the absence of that actually happening, we know that no fly zones cross a clear red line in a way that supplying weapons and vehicles of war do not.
elbows
Well-Known Member
Beyond the mutually assured destruction red lines I have been going on about, there are certainly other lines beyond which specific countries might not be too keen to tread. And certainly we are in the midst of the period when countries and blocks are overcompensating via rhetoric for all the ways in which they are blatantly not actually going to end up defending Ukraine. They want to be seen to be doing all they can, but because of MAD they've mostly had to make those noises while still being very clear about what stuff is obviously off limits. Perhaps now we've reached a point where they are starting to make a mess of some of their rhetoric in response to specific appeals from Ukraine, and so we are to be treated to some unfortunate yo-yoing.
Spymaster
Plastic Paddy
No. You are arguing with me because you haven't read the same parts of the thread that I have, and as far as I can tell (I'm relying on Bimble here and she can't figure out what's going on) you're probably still wrong.
Again, I disagree. My contention is that Russia will react equally badly to the EU supplying planes as they would to the imposition of an NFZ, regardless of the material differences between the two.
Can you supply evidence that EU countries are still prepared to supply the planes? If not, the rest of your post is moot. If they do, I will simply say it's a very fucking bad idea.
Yuwipi Woman
Whack-A-Mole Queen
I really do wish the news outlets would learn to do metric conversions. I've heard varying lengths for how long the tank convoy heading for Kiev is supposed to be. I've heard anywhere from 10 miles, 16 miles, 17 miles, 20 miles, to 37 miles. You'd think they'd do enough fact checking to get that right at least.
kebabking
Not a Girly Swot, but I like them....
There is probably a good slice of timing here as well - almost all the jets involved were, to some extent or other, between the second line of their countries fleets, or sat in a hanger rotting gently.
The chances that some/most/all of them were in instantly flyaway, combat ready condition is unlikely - and while they are almost exactly the same models of aircraft the Ukrainians fly, there will be little differences that the Ukrainians will need to train on like communications systems, navigation, weapons systems, possibly ejection seats - so while it's possible that Ukr pilots could rock up, kick the tyres and light the fires, and be straffing Russian tank columns in an hour, I think it's at the less likely end of the options.
If it's going to take a week to get them in fighting condition, but their airfields in Ukraine will be over run in 4 days, then the aggro and potential conflict with Russia isn't worth the effort.
The chances that some/most/all of them were in instantly flyaway, combat ready condition is unlikely - and while they are almost exactly the same models of aircraft the Ukrainians fly, there will be little differences that the Ukrainians will need to train on like communications systems, navigation, weapons systems, possibly ejection seats - so while it's possible that Ukr pilots could rock up, kick the tyres and light the fires, and be straffing Russian tank columns in an hour, I think it's at the less likely end of the options.
If it's going to take a week to get them in fighting condition, but their airfields in Ukraine will be over run in 4 days, then the aggro and potential conflict with Russia isn't worth the effort.
teuchter
je suis teuchter
Although, the reality is that none of us have the faintest idea of what the implications of a 10 vs a 37 mile convoy is, so it actually doesn't really matter.
elbows
Well-Known Member
On that level its not complicated and others already made the point. The material differences between the two make all the difference in the world.
A no fly zone in practice means a we fly zone, and a 'we prevent the enemy flying' zone. Which in practice means a NATO-enabled no fly zone means direct engagement between the military of some NATO powers and Russia, which means war, the big war, the war neither side will want to trigger.
Supplying planes is not the same. Russia wont like it, but there are many things it doesnt like that still dont trigger that war, there is no automatic trigger because it does not involve direct engagement in the way a no-fly zone does.
Just look at what sort of weapons countries have openly agreed to supply already, including weapons that can be used to bring down Russian aircraft. Why are those not in the same category as supplying planes as far as you are concerned?
bimble
floofy
non breaking news, good writing.
theswordandthesandwich.substack.com
The Battle of Kyiv
Russia's forward advance in Ukraine is a journey backward in time
theswordandthesandwich.substack.com
elbows
Well-Known Member
Our perceptions of what happens next and when are being jerked around by the news cycle and the tiny amounts of information on offer for sure. Likewise Russians have also been jerked around via domestic propaganda from their own analysts which make all sorts of claims about how quickly operations will be completed. Claims that can quickly shift without them batting an eyelid once initial estimates dont come to fruition.
We've been told pretty much nothing about what Ukrainian military resources still sit between the Russian forces and Kyiv for a start. We dont know whether Russia will wait till its branch from the east that we see on maps also reaches Kyiv. We dont even know what they plan to do in regards Kyiv once they are ready, or indeed what the Ukrainian government will do at that stage. And since there is bound to be a large psychological element, a lot of the perceptions that are being generated on both sides may be more about that psychological battle than what is actually going to happen on any particular day.
magneze
🎧
FFS, that's pathetic.The state of it. When the UK announced asset freezes what actually happened is that they are giving them 30 days (!) to move their money out leisurely.
'the Treasury unit in charge of enforcing the UK’s sanctions quietly issued a 30-day licence granting permission for any individual or entity to “wind down any transactions” with VTB until 27 March.."
"This is a ridiculous position for Britain to put itself in. An asset freeze needs to be immediate and total. If you are leaving those subject to it a month for the sanction to become active then anything you want to freeze will be long gone. It is absurd.”
Russian bank customers have 30 days to wind down assets under 'absurd' UK sanctions loophole
Russia's second largest bank, VTB, has been granted a 30-day exemption for clients to close transactions and move assetsinews.co.uk
gosub
~#
its russian designed kit ......doesn't need tidy airfields to operate from and will be a hell of lot less type conversion training than anything else anyone can offer. But give them a paint job at least . Would be awful if Russia were able to deliberatly get the wrrong end of the stick
cupid_stunt
Happy New Year!
I've only heard it's 65km or 40 miles long. Variations come in of the estimated distance from Kiev, depending on if it's to the edge or centre of the city
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
About time everyone fully switched to metric!
60 km seems to be the most common estimate.
37 miles will have been a conversion of 60 km. That's a pet hate of mine - converting to an inappropriate exactness. 60 km is a rough estimate to the nearest 10, so 40 miles would be the correct conversion.
stdP
One Swiss dinosaur in Polly Gosling's anorak hood
Conversion issues side, there's been a few reports today that the convoy isn't entirely contiguous - not an unbroken line of X miles but rather several different subsets. Potentially logistical problems are contributing to the appearance of this, or perhaps just spotty reporting/satellite coverage.
In simpler terms, it's a metric fuckton (approx. 2.3 imperial fuckloads) of armour, troops and support vehicles.
andysays
Love and solidarity
I would guess that at least some of the point of the offer of the jets* is that it's a gesture of solidarity, a way of offering support without actually getting involved directly and in a way which would almost certainly trigger serious escalation.
I don't know how significant that gesture would be, compared to the potential military value, but I would imagine it has some value as propaganda or whatever.
*and we're still not sure if it will actually materialise
two sheds
Least noticed poster 2007
This plan for refugees is something I think we can all get behind 
www.theguardian.com
Put Ukrainian refugees in oligarchs’ London houses, Lviv mayor says
In interview with Guardian, Andriy Sadovyi also calls for Nato countries to establish immediate no-fly zone over Ukraine
Similar threads
