|
Virtually? Or is he planning on bringing his table with him?
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2022 11:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 22:41 |
|
|
That Italian Guy posted:During Zelensky's address to the Italian Parliament the other day, 350+ MPs (out of 945) did not attend. Only about 20 were out sick; you can add the usual absenteist, but it paints a bleak picture about the Russian involvement in the Italian politics. You have your usual far right stuff that's all over Europe, of course (although Salvini did clap, probably still hot from the negative press he got when the Polish major scolded him on live TV for his support of Putin)...but you also have M5S. According to the Sole (https://www.ilsole24ore.com/art/oggi-camere-riunite-zelensky-ecco-parlamentari-che-diserteranno-AEiH3jLB) the bulk of the missing deputies are from Alternativa and ItalExit(think Farage and co for UK readers), lega/m5s have some but not as much. Still shameful esp since the final equipment donation list is pretty much "helmets, ballistic armor and police vehicles" https://www.ilsole24ore.com/art/dai-giubbotti-antiproiettile-elmetti-cosa-prevede-decreto-ucraina-armi-AE0bFDMB
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2022 11:22
|
|
|
Russians: won't call if a war, will call the survivors veterans. Hopefully that means dead soldiers' families get benefits anyway https://twitter.com/KevinRothrock/status/1506576324831416322?t=4uuw37jfpdAfcYFPXNWqtg&s=19 Also interesting to note - Russia's defense Minister hasn't been seen in public/on camera in 11 days https://twitter.com/KevinRothrock/status/1506575201726877698?t=0ogwuUySlE0VnAkrUdqjmg&s=19 "Heart problems" huh 
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2022 11:24
|
|
|
PederP posted:
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2022 11:27
|
|
|
KitConstantine posted:"Heart problems" huh Acute alcohol induced cardiomyopathy is a thing. It’s called “holiday heart” in the states.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2022 11:27
|
|
|
GABA ghoul posted:That's gonna be one awkward meeting unless they boot Russia from the G20 As Russia's decided not to be in the global economy seems pretty pointless for them to come to a summit to talk about issues in the global economy.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2022 11:28
|
|
|
dr_rat posted:As Russia's decided not to be in the global economy seems pretty pointless for them to come to a summit to talk about issues in the global economy. They could have the observer status to see how the rest of the world works
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2022 11:34
|
|
|
KitConstantine posted:"Heart problems" huh Should have gone with him having trouble with new and very slippery shoes and having developed a fable for window architecture lately
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2022 11:34
|
|
|
Charlz Guybon posted:Poland would have intervened immediately on the side of the Baltics and from what we've seen that would have been enough to beat the Russians. I wouldn't count on that. First Polish army would have to either conquer or disable Kaliningrad, while Suwałki are not bombed to ash or conquered by thurst from Belarus..
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2022 11:35
|
|
|
Aertuun posted:I also don't think we should overlook how exceptionally the Ukraine military has performed, particularly when looking at how any other European country could defend itself, in isolation, against a similar attack. Finland takes umbrage with this. Defending against this has been the militarys entire reason for existing for 70 years.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2022 11:36
|
|
|
Aertuun posted:I'm not sure when the US last had to deal with a modern air defense network. The Kosovo war, a quarter of a century ago? If the US is unable to deploy its air power as an "I Win" card, how do the ground forces alone stack up? My understanding is the conflict becomes very, very challenging. Didn't Gaddafi have a pretty good military, including anti-air at least as good as Ukraine's? NATO (really, the US) utterly toasted them in 2011, to the extent that I was hearing that AA units were abandoning their vehicles because they knew they'd be targeted and blown up. Not sure if that was propaganda, buyt even the Tunisian news reported things like that. It sounds like US propaganda, but also reasonable; I sure as gently caress would have bailed out of my S-300 or whatever they had if I were a Libyan AA guy and knew the US was going on massive bombing runs across the country. I didn't expect the air to go as uncontested as it was for NATO in Libya, but I expected it a lot more along those lines, as did I think nearly everyone else. I guess the USAF is reasonably performance-justifying its absurd budget. (E: Not sure how accurate it is, but someone did a very detailed writeup of the state of Libyan anti-air in 2011: http://www.ausairpower.net/PDF-A/DT-Libya-Jun-2011.pdf ) Also nice to see that a large minority of Italians are still in love with incompetent fascist dictators. Saladman fucked around with this message at 12:02 on Mar 23, 2022 |
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2022 11:39
|
|
|
Regardin Russia maybe running out of missiles - they're apparently firing costal defense missiles at targets on land in Ukraine https://twitter.com/kemal_115/status/1506557042881875971?t=_S3DBoqVBL3Sv5DT5wYMJw&s=19 Apparently they did this in Syria as well at some point? Still seems odd to me. I guess if you are running out of your other semi-precision stuff you take what you get
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2022 11:40
|
|
|
KitConstantine posted:Regardin Russia maybe running out of missiles - they're apparently firing costal defense missiles at targets on land in Ukraine Well, they're missiles and can hit anything I guess. ""These complexes are able to destroy both sea and ground targets at a distance of 350 kilometers at sea and almost 450 kilometers over land," Defense Minister Shoigu said at Russian President Vladimir Putin's meeting with representatives of the Defense Ministry." Although the side-impact specialization of it would be pointless for a land target, but since Ukraine doesn't have a navy then I guess they have no reason to keep them in reserve, regardless of whether they're running out of other precision missiles, which they probably are, but since these are new I imagine it's also useful for them to see how they perform in ground combat situations.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2022 11:45
|
|
Alchenar posted:Virtually? Or is he planning on bringing his table with him? I know it's a joke but honestly, if this is in person is he going to want the images of other world leaders not shaking his hand or staying away from him? It projects weakness in my opinion.
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2022 12:09
|
|
|
Herstory Begins Now posted:That's not to say the engagements aren't bloody for Ukraine, TDF in particular appear to have some pretty rough results against tanks and IFVs when they aren't accompanied by regular forces. TDF are mainly volunteer-based (only 40k professional soldiers there), and are not supposed to be deployed solo - always with army, police, or whichever other institution needs an extra pair of hands. Gorman Thomas posted:If you have the source for that handy can you link it? Google is only giving me stories about the foreign combat vets currently in Ukraine. That number isn't just active military correct? Yeah it’s not just active military (~205k combat personnel), it’s literally everyone considered a combat veteran, regardless of what they’re currently doing. The source is this interview with deputy minister of veteran affairs, who said they have 407k Donbas war veterans in their books. In Eastern European use of the term it only refers to combat specialties.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2022 12:12
|
|
|
Seth Pecksniff posted:I know it's a joke but honestly, if this is in person is he going to want the images of other world leaders not shaking his hand or staying away from him? It projects weakness in my opinion. It is in October. And yeah, I think pictures of Putin coming to the table and being snubbed by other world leaders would be perfect for Russian propaganda. Particularly if it's just the North American and European leaders refusing to shake hands.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2022 12:13
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:Virtually? Or is he planning on bringing his table with him? He's just booking a seat for whoever manages to coup him.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2022 12:14
|
|
|
Saladman posted:Didn't Gaddafi have a pretty good military, including anti-air at least as good as Ukraine's? Not even close, from my understanding. The military was very small and outdated. That was also a country in the middle of a civil war. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_military_intervention_in_Libya His Divine Shadow posted:Finland takes umbrage with this. Defending against this has been the militarys entire reason for existing for 70 years. This is very true, apologies! My main concern is that I'm not sure how many others can take umbrage. If you take away the US, a lot of Europe appears to be very, very vulnerable.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2022 12:16
|
|
|
KitConstantine posted:Regardin Russia maybe running out of missiles - they're apparently firing costal defense missiles at targets on land in Ukraine Bastion is just a name for land-based Oniks, and those can be fired at land and sea targets. Pretty much every modern anti-ship missile has a land attack mode as well. I mean, they are there, they have enough range, and you can get snazzy videos of missiles launching and hitting
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2022 12:17
|
|
|
Kestral posted:I've been wondering about the bolded part in particular over the last week or so. Not intending to call out Sodomy Hussein here, but I saw this post and it made me wonder if that's going to be the case, and I'd be interested in a discussion on it, since it seems to be a fairly widely held belief. My assumption has been that eventually we're going to see Russia reconnect with the rest of the world, with a progression something like (but almost certainly not exactly like): There are going to be two fundamental issues preventing Russia "returning to the fold" over the long term. The first is that every other European (and by this I mean EU) state is now worrying about an Actual Russian Invasion. It isn't theoretical any more; if he's willing to invade Ukraine, Ukraine has land borders with Hungary and Poland, and we all knew who invaded Poland, right? Plus Hungary and Poland are in the EU and NATO. So if dude is crazy enough to actually start a war and invade, you have to take that seriously if you live in Europe. Keep in mind that WW2 happened there, like right there, for these countries, it's recent history and not just an academic thing that happened overseas to other people. The second is that by being this crazy Putin has absolutely torpedoed business investment. The problem there isn't just the sanctions, it's that he nationalized industries and assets in response to the sanctions. A lot of the businesses that have left Russia did so in advance of sanctions; they didn't have to leave, they just wanted to get out because Putin's actions have demonstrated Russia is not a reliable or safe business environment. poo poo, dude confiscated like all the commercial planes in Russia; Russia is never going to have an international airline business again while Putin's government lasts, period. So on an emotional level the rest of Europe is going to be skittish around Russia for as long as Putin is in power and has a military, and on a practical level business is not going to go back to Russia while Putin is in power because the risk/benefit analysis just changed too much going forward. None of this is returning to normal for Russia any time soon.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2022 12:38
|
|
, capital seeking some perceived profit, genuine but misguided diplomatic attempts to get them to cooperate, and Russia's own efforts to compromise them through, for example, blackmail and corruption.
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:Putin's actions have demonstrated Russia is not a reliable or safe business environment. This is probably the biggest factor. The guy seems pretty unpredictable no one can truthfully say whether or not he'd attempt something similar with Georgia again, or annex Belarus if there's a coup there. You don't want to be the business investing billions of dollars into some mine or gas project or a big factory only to find that he's kicked off another war and your investment is effectively worthless. I think it will take his removal from power and strong signals that Russia's foreign policy has changed permanently for foreign investment to return to pre-war levels.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2022 12:51
|
|
|
I think it will take more than his removal - it will take full-on castration of political capabilities of siloviki, to ensure that a Putin 2.0 scenario is not likely.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2022 12:53
|
|
|
PederP posted:This really cannot be stated enough. I am sick and tired of people in the cushier parts of Europe going "oh lol we could have beaten Russia blindfolded - look at their flailing". We absolutely could not. Sure the US presence might have punished Russia hard and bought time for reinforcements to beat them back - but not before Russia had dealt tremendous damage. And in the case of the Baltics, a fait accompli is not entirely implausible. And with the wrong president at the helm, things might have been very grim. France, UK and a smattering of other EU states could likely have mobilized and force the war to an end, but it would not be pretty and I sincerely doubt they'd be willing to pay the cost of dislodging entrenched Russian forces from the Baltics or Scandinavia. Are you in France or the United Kingdom? If so you are completely wrong, your militaries would have kicked the poo poo out of the Russians. I am supremely confident in this seeing the Russian military ‘power’ on full display in Ukraine.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2022 12:53
|
|
|
Not sure when this is from but this extremely short clip appears to be a young lad molotoving the side of the Kremlin, being shared by anti-war Russians https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IA5SnN1ykyM
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2022 12:53
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:There are going to be two fundamental issues preventing Russia "returning to the fold" over the long term. Bolded is the important part that still keeps the invasion theorethical. Hell, Russia has a land border with Poland and Lithuania, and they are storing weapons, including possibly nuclear ones, there. They don't need to conquer Ukraine to have direct access to these countries. And I dunno, while we do see an unprecedented level of solidarity when it comes to sanctions, I do believe that with time, they will also hit people living in EU, putting pressure on companies and governments to do something about it - which might lead to lifting of sanctions. I think that it would be horrible and basically a political suicide for whoever is ruling at the moment, but our govenment has shown tendecies that can be described as such, so I wouldn't be surprised anymore. However, on the other hand, this is the only government that I view as having the capacity to  connections to Russia precisely out of spite. So it's really a coin toss at this point. alex314 posted:I wouldn't count on that. First Polish army would have to either conquer or disable Kaliningrad, while Suwałki are not bombed to ash or conquered by thurst from Belarus.. We could revenge-annex the Kaliningrad Oblast, just gotta give Lithuania a call  I'd say it would be only just for 1772
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2022 12:53
|
|
|
Kikas posted:
The other part of this is that Russia doesn't have much to offer that other nations can't offer just as easily once the cost has been paid to shift to those markets. Sure Russia has oil and gas but so do other places. Once new business relationships are built with other nations -- which is already happening -- there's little reason to invest in going back to dealing with Russia given that Russia's government is ~*this*~ and might gently caress your investment at any moment.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2022 12:57
|
|
|
Russia, as expected, is saying a peacekeeping force is a reckless idea which would lead to a direct conflict between NATO and Russia https://twitter.com/MailOnline/status/1506581553048076290?s=20&t=MDR4tlkyRelS7wsDQetMWA https://www.foxnews.com/world/russian-foreign-minister-lavrov-issues-cryptic-warning-about-direct-clash-with-nato The US has explicitly ruled out participating in any such mission and given the unequivocal statements made by Biden, Stoltenberg and Scholz about preventing the war from escalating to involve other countries, I doubt it's a proposal that will enjoy any kind of wider support. The US ambassador to the UN can't exactly poo poo on an ally like Poland but this statement certainly suggests to me that any country deciding to Leeroy Jenkins their way into Ukraine would be doing so unilaterally and outside the aegis of the US and NATO: ""Again, I can't preview what decisions will be made at this NATO conference and how NATO will respond to the Polish proposal," Thomas-Greenfield replied. "What I can say is American troops will not be on the ground in Ukraine at this moment. The president has been clear on that. And other NATO countries may decide that they want to put troops inside of Ukraine. That will be a decision that they have to make."" https://thehill.com/policy/international/598961-top-diplomat-rules-out-us-role-in-ukraine-peacekeeping-mission
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2022 12:59
|
|
|
ZombieLenin posted:Are you in France or the United Kingdom? If so you are completely wrong, your militaries would have kicked the poo poo out of the Russians. PerilPastry posted:Russia, as expected, is saying a peacekeeping force is a reckless idea which would lead to a direct conflict between NATO and Russia
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2022 13:04
|
|
|
ZombieLenin posted:Are you in France or the United Kingdom? If so you are completely wrong, your militaries would have kicked the poo poo out of the Russians. I'm Danish and have friends/family across Scandinavia, Central/Eastern Europe and the Baltics. Sure, Russia would be stopped. But not at the border. Not without massive destruction being rained down on our cities. A fait accompli might put the more powerful western nations in a tight spot if Russian just camped on Baltics and strategic Scandinavians gains. The point I am trying to make isn't to deny that the Russia military is deeply flawed and far less a threat than it was thought prior to the invasion - I am denying that they would easily have been defeated if they'd picked a weaker target. The cost would have been at least as high as it has been for Ukraine. I am just saying Ukraine sacrificed a lot, have a very robust ground force compared to many NATO countries, and not all countries might've stomached the same loss of civilian life without folding. And it especially annoys me to see Scandinavians and Germans dismiss Russia as harmless.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2022 13:08
|
|
|
NATO's entire response force constitutes around 40k troops: https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/topics_49755.htm. That's the stuff that would be guaranteed to be ready to show up one day one of a war. If there were a serious risk of a war with Russia then you would expect countries to be scrambling to have additional forces ready to deploy as soon as possible, but even if you doubled that then there would still be a serious problem of mass if the Russians put up their 200k field army to push West. Almost certainly one of the reasons Ukraine is still in the fight is because they've mobilised the numbers to be able to stand in the line against the Russians and take even or potentially even higher losses than them and not fall apart. Everything that's been written about military formations becoming combat ineffective once they take a certain proportion of losses is just as true of NATO units as it is Russian, and NATO units are smaller to start with (depending on what you are looking at).
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2022 13:08
|
|
|
Sitting safely under America's nuclear umbrella for the past 50 years does tend to make the smaller countries not want to put a lot of money into defense.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2022 13:12
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:Almost certainly one of the reasons Ukraine is still in the fight is because they've mobilised the numbers to be able to stand in the line against the Russians and take even or potentially even higher losses than them and not fall apart. PederP posted:I'm Danish and have friends/family across Scandinavia, Central/Eastern Europe and the Baltics. Sure, Russia would be stopped. But not at the border. Not without massive destruction being rained down on our cities. A fait accompli might put the more powerful western nations in a tight spot if Russian just camped on Baltics and strategic Scandinavians gains. Absolutely, the Danish military has been subject to so many "trim the fat" efficiency reforms that it's left them with practically no discretionary leeway/operational buffer and made the idea of meaningful territorial defense a joke pretty much. NCOs and officers have been fleeing the service for a decade+ too, right? PerilPastry fucked around with this message at 13:23 on Mar 23, 2022 |
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2022 13:16
|
|
|
Probably surprising to no one here, but one of the major newspapers in Canada, the Toronto Star conducted a poll asking people if Russia's invasion of Ukraine was justified. The responses were broken down by vaccination status. https://twitter.com/oneunderscore__/status/1505642779795283968 Last week, a reporter from another major Canadian newspaper, The Globe and Mail, was posting screenshots from a bunch of the Trucker Convoy WhatsApp and Telegram channels. They were all filled with pro-Russian/pro-Putin propaganda. A lot of it was pretty anti-Semitic too. The reporter said that the anti-vax messaging channels had almost instantly turned to anti-Ukrainian messaging as soon as the war began. Mr. Apollo fucked around with this message at 13:27 on Mar 23, 2022 |
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2022 13:17
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:NATO's entire response force constitutes around 40k troops: https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/topics_49755.htm. That's the stuff that would be guaranteed to be ready to show up one day one of a war. If there were a serious risk of a war with Russia then you would expect countries to be scrambling to have additional forces ready to deploy as soon as possible, but even if you doubled that then there would still be a serious problem of mass if the Russians put up their 200k field army to push West. Almost certainly one of the reasons Ukraine is still in the fight is because they've mobilised the numbers to be able to stand in the line against the Russians and take even or potentially even higher losses than them and not fall apart. A couple things are highly underestimating the strength of NATO air power. The Iraqis advanced a couple miles in Saudi Arabia during the first Gulf War too—and were wiped out and immediately forced to run very fast back to Iraqi controlled territory. And that 40,000 number you mention is just the NATO rapid reaction force. You are forgetting about the armed forces of the Eastern NATO countries already in place. ZombieLenin fucked around with this message at 13:21 on Mar 23, 2022 |
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2022 13:19
|
|
Alchenar posted:NATO's entire response force constitutes around 40k troops: https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/topics_49755.htm. That's the stuff that would be guaranteed to be ready to show up one day one of a war. If there were a serious risk of a war with Russia then you would expect countries to be scrambling to have additional forces ready to deploy as soon as possible, but even if you doubled that then there would still be a serious problem of mass if the Russians put up their 200k field army to push West.
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2022 13:19
|
|
|
Mr. Apollo posted:Probably surprising to no one here, but one of the major newspapers in Canada, the Toronto Star conducted a poll asking people if Russia's invasion of Ukraine was justified. The responses were broken down by vaccination status. Authoritarian doesn't really capture it. It's more against any opinion espoused by the liberal TV man.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2022 13:20
|
|
|
His Divine Shadow posted:Finland takes umbrage with this. Defending against this has been the militarys entire reason for existing for 70 years. Aertuun posted:This is very true, apologies! Not only the military, the whole society crisis management is engineered with this task in mind. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Total_defence But in all honesty the Finnish defence model recognises that it could not fight off a full scale assault from a determined nuclear armed superpower. The point being that the defence is strong enough that it will make any attack so costly that it generally would never be worth it, in addition to buying time for (hopefully) foreign assistance being able to join in the war.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2022 13:20
|
|
|
mobby_6kl posted:It is... but they are occupying large parts of eastern and southern Ukraine. Which is realistically the most they'd ever want to try to annex. Regime change in Kyiv seems like was a last-moment bonus objective. No. The triumphalist essay they accidentally pushed out at day two made it very loving clear that subjugating Ukraine was at that point their only goal.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2022 13:23
|
|
Mr. Apollo posted:Probably surprising to no one here, but one of the major newspapers in Canada, the Toronto Star conducted a poll asking people if Russia's invasion of Ukraine was justified. The responses were broken down by vaccination status. That 52% vs 2% is staggering. Super interesting stuff.
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2022 13:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 22:41 |
|
|
That Italian Guy posted:That 52% vs 2% is staggering. Super interesting stuff. Those 5G mind control chips are working like a charm, looks like. That Italian Guy posted:To be fair a decisive obstacle to Russia's advance has been logistical. Being unable to push 50km into UA without your stuff breaking down would make it difficult to push 10 times more to wage war in central and western EU. Have the Russians even established any meaningful Forward Operating Bases at this point? Have any OSINT guys weighed in on this? PerilPastry fucked around with this message at 13:32 on Mar 23, 2022 |
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2022 13:30
|
|