READ OP! War in Ukraine: a distressed blender making too many margaritas at once

The Something Awful Forums > Archives > Comedy Goldmine > The Goodmine > READ OP! War in Ukraine: a distressed blender making too many margaritas at once

«‹›2023 »

dr_rat: Jun 4, 2001

Pook Good Mook posted:

Not really without time or equipment that Ukraine doesn't have.

You fight mass artillery with either extremely fortified positions (think heavy concrete or massive trench networks), or airpower to neutralize the artillery. You can theoretically defend by attacking if you are able to mass enough fast-moving forces to get into the rear areas, but Ukraine doesn't have that ability either.

They should be getting artillery with smart shells that can out reach Russian artillery soon though right? I know there were definitely official reports that they were being sent, and Ukrainian troops were getting training for newer artillery pieces, but I don't think there's been any official word on when they would be getting to the front.

# ? May 26, 2022 20:01

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Jun 4, 2024 03:32

Pook Good Mook: Aug 6, 2013; ENFORCE THE UNITED STATES DRESS CODE AT ALL COSTS!

This message paid for by the Men's Wearhouse& Jos A Bank Lobbying Group

dr_rat posted:

They should be getting artillery with smart shells that can out reach Russian artillery soon though right? I know there were definitely official reports that they were being sent, and Ukrainian troops were getting training for newer artillery pieces, but I don't think there's been any official word on when they would be getting to the front.

Those are NATO shells that can be used on NATO compatible cannons only. Ukraine has gotten some NATO cannons, but they number in the 10's. Russia has thousands of artillery pieces and near unlimited shells. The Ukrainian long-range artillery/shells can't be everywhere at once.

Drones are a more realistic option than the long-range guided shells. But Russia still has active anti-air that is basically for this very purpose.

Pook Good Mook fucked around with this message at 20:08 on May 26, 2022

# ? May 26, 2022 20:06

cinci zoo sniper: Mar 15, 2013

Kraftwerk posted:

Then it sounds like Russia is gonna seize Donetsk and Luhansk, dig in and hope the west stops arming Ukraine while they annex these territories and sue for peace.

Unoccupied area of Donetsk is fairly large. Not sure how suing for peace would work in the current environment too.

# ? May 26, 2022 20:06

Pook Good Mook: Aug 6, 2013; ENFORCE THE UNITED STATES DRESS CODE AT ALL COSTS!

This message paid for by the Men's Wearhouse& Jos A Bank Lobbying Group

Also, Russia has painted itself into a corner. Even if they capture those areas, the sanctions aren't being lifted. "Victory" isn't possible in any traditional sense.

# ? May 26, 2022 20:07

cinci zoo sniper: Mar 15, 2013

Ynglaur posted:

Or use infiltration tactics first used in trench warfare by Germany in ...1916?...to get into the rear. This is what it seems like UA did around Kyiv. Large numbers of small infantry formations--probably platoon-sized or smaller--given an area to go hunt. Meanwhile main forces try to hold more conventional defensive lines.

I think one of the challenges in the Donbass is that it's a relatively small area, so Russian forces are concentrated to the degree that infiltration is much harder to accomplish (versus, say, a 40km-long convoy).

Armchair etc, but wouldn�t this be much more difficult given an actual frontline now? Half of the Kyiv action felt that it transpired that way because Russians only paid attention in the direction facing the city, leaving their flanks exposed and forgetting about entire villages in the rear. In LDNR are everything is bristling with proper trenches and mapped out encampments, and the sole �open flank� of Russian forces is probably the Kharkiv area.

# ? May 26, 2022 20:14

FMguru: Sep 10, 2003; peed on;
sexually

Ynglaur posted:

I think one of the challenges in the Donbass is that it's a relatively small area, so Russian forces are concentrated to the degree that infiltration is much harder to accomplish (versus, say, a 40km-long convoy).

Also, as I understand it, the terrain in that area is very flat and open, with much less cover and fewer chokepoints for setting up ambushes, and that makes infiltration/hit-and-run style tactics a lot harder.

# ? May 26, 2022 20:20

Pook Good Mook: Aug 6, 2013; ENFORCE THE UNITED STATES DRESS CODE AT ALL COSTS!

This message paid for by the Men's Wearhouse& Jos A Bank Lobbying Group

cinci zoo sniper posted:

Armchair etc, but wouldn�t this be much more difficult given an actual frontline now? Half of the Kyiv action felt that it transpired that way because Russians only paid attention in the direction facing the city, leaving their flanks exposed and forgetting about entire villages in the rear. In LDNR are everything is bristling with proper trenches and mapped out encampments, and the sole �open flank� of Russian forces is probably the Kharkiv area.

This and also the mud season is ending. Armor will have an easier time moving cross-country.

# ? May 26, 2022 20:23

PederP: Nov 20, 2009

The whole 'dig in and the war freezes' thing doesn't make sense:

1) There's a massive occupied area in the south which is far too large to fortify. Even if Russia takes Donbas (and they're quite some way from that still) and digs in there, there's territory stretching all the way to Kherson which cannot be held with the same amount of firepower and concentration of force.

2) Russia is the invader. Invading is expensive and has to end with an occupation at some point. They can't keep the current amount of forces in Donbas for years to come. It doesn't work like that. An invader can't just peace out like it was some Paradox game, when they're happy with territorial gains. Historical invasions that do not end up occupying the entire country or forcing a surrender end with failure.

3) The economic warfare against Russia - including the effects of public opinion in the west (which has effectively forced a lot of companies to not do business in Russia, even when sanctions would allow for it) - isn't the trivial matter that some try to depict it. The Ruble exchange rate is an incredibly poor metric for the state of Russian economy. Actually relevant metrics show a near collapse of the Russian economy. This alone makes it impossible for them to end this war in a manner that doesn't appease western public opinion.

Right now, Russia has only two options - fight on with spite and brutality to try and somehow open a crack in the hitherto ironclad Ukrainian will to resists, or give up and go back home. The latter would be a very hard sell at home and I am not sure Putin has enough connection to reality to realize it (whether that be from brain worms or sycophantic misinformation). So they'll fight on until they can't continue. The spite and brutality is on full display. I expect that to continue.

But this war is already lost for Russia. The only question is how much suffering, death and destruction they will inflict on Ukraine before they accept the defeat and abort the invasion - and how big a risk of total social and economic collapse in Russia Putin's insane war will end up causing.

# ? May 26, 2022 20:28

Ynglaur: Oct 9, 2013; The Malta Conference, anyone?

Yes and yes. That was kind of my point.

I know the conventional wisdom is that armor longs for the open plains, but as a former tanker, gently caress that. Open ground is death ground. Give me a good set of wooded low ground to crawl up any day of the week. I'll flash you a bit of turret to get you looking my way while my section-mate shoots you in the side. There are times when rolling at 80kph across open terrain is the correct tactic, but it's not something you do if you can help it.

Don't get me wrong: I hope Russian tanks do exactly that. Then there will be fewer Russian tanks.

# ? May 26, 2022 20:28

Tomn: Aug 23, 2007; And the angel said unto him
"Stop hitting yourself. Stop hitting yourself."
But lo he could not. For the angel was hitting him with his own hands

PederP posted:

2) Russia is the invader. Invading is expensive and has to end with an occupation at some point. They can't keep the current amount of forces in Donbas for years to come. It doesn't work like that. An invader can't just peace out like it was some Paradox game, when they're happy with territorial gains. Historical invasions that do not end up occupying the entire country or forcing a surrender end with failure.

While not arguing against your overall point, I do want to point out that this isn't really true at all historically. Very often a lot of modern thinking is colored by the memory of World War 2, being the last really big war, but it must be remembered that WW2 was kind of a historical outlier. "Forcing a surrender" is kind of a loose definition but there's been plenty of situations where the defending side in an invasion still had the theoretical capacity to resist territorial landgrabs but decided it wasn't worth the cost of trying anymore - in fact, arguably this was the norm for most wars between great powers prior to, say, the Napoleonic era, as no great power wanted to commit completely to any single war lest a third party pounce on them in their weakness, and it wasn't uncommon for territory that was never occupied to change hands as part of the horse-trading in peace negotiations afterwards, even for the "losing" party to walk away with some territorial gains to help offset their losses.

The thing is, the geopolitical situation is such that Russia is basically the only enemy Ukraine needs to be seriously concerned about - anybody else attacking them is more or less completely unthinkable except in the fever dreams of Russian state television. They can afford to commit entirely to this war if they think it's worth it, and given that it appears quite likely that Russian will remain a constant and permanent threat if not stopped "Smash their face in as hard as we can while we can" actively improves Ukrainian security long-term where conceding territory for peace would not.

# ? May 26, 2022 21:39

Edgar Allen Ho: Apr 3, 2017; by sebmojo

How are u posted:

It's not. It may be less bad for the US than many other places, but its still bad and still causing global instability and could still set off all sorts of awful knock-on effects in the near future. This war is not good for the US.

Really depends what you mean by "benefitting the US." For the average american the war has made everything worse. Less worse than getting your home bombed, but still worse.

And that's just the material sense. Eternal reminder that loads upon loads of russians and ukrainians live here and are both russian/ukrainian and american. There's huge immaterial losses being dealt with. Find a local orthodox church. They're prolly collecting donations and have lots of first-gen immigrants to chat with. They will prolly give you good rear end food and be flattered that you care at all. Just dodge russian orthodox churches with rashist priests.

# ? May 26, 2022 21:42

Gucci Loafers: May 20, 2006; Ask yourself, do you really want to talk to pair of really nice gaudy shoes?

https://twitter.com/RALee85/status/1529941404914524160?s=20&t=Eud-xKo2OpBlx4YCvkqifw

:tviv:

https://twitter.com/NatashaBertrand/status/1529939191378984988?s=20&t=Eud-xKo2OpBlx4YCvkqifw

This is a big deal. I guess maybe they'll re-take Donbass and Crimea after all?

# ? May 26, 2022 22:48

Rigel: Nov 11, 2016

huh, not long ago, like maybe a week ago we were hearing that the US was refusing to send long-range rockets because then if Ukraine beats back Russia they might be tempted to get too aggressive and start attacking deep into Russia.

Now its "gently caress it, give all the weapons that don't have wings".

# ? May 26, 2022 22:55

Atreiden: May 4, 2008

Hopefully this goes through and fast, though the article is more hesitant than the tweet.
https://twitter.com/NatashaBertrand/status/1529939191378984988
https://edition.cnn.com/2022/05/26/politics/us-long-range-rockets-ukraine-mlrs/index.html

quote:

The Biden administration is preparing to step up the kind of weaponry it is offering Ukraine by sending advanced, long-range rocket systems that are now the top request from Ukrainian officials, multiple officials say.

The administration is leaning toward sending the systems as part of a larger package of military and security assistance to Ukraine, which could be announced as soon as next week.

quote:

The Biden administration waivered for weeks, however, on whether to send the systems, amid concerns raised within the National Security Council that Ukraine could use the systems to carry out offensive attacks inside Russia, officials said.

At this point I really feel like we should get over this concern and just provide Ukraine everything they need to win this war. Especially since even if it is announced next week, it will take about two weeks to train Ukrainian soldiers to use them from there, so at least 3 weeks from now before they would be in Ukraine, likely more.

quote:

It would not take too long to train the Ukrainians on any of the rocket launcher systems, officials told CNN � likely about two weeks, they said

# ? May 26, 2022 22:58

Vox Nihili: May 28, 2008

dr_rat posted:

They should be getting artillery with smart shells that can out reach Russian artillery soon though right? I know there were definitely official reports that they were being sent, and Ukrainian troops were getting training for newer artillery pieces, but I don't think there's been any official word on when they would be getting to the front.

Only a tiny fraction of their artillery has this capability and they've only trained enough guys to use like 20% of that tiny fraction. Meanwhile they're getting hammered by massed Russian artillery every day. Ukraine has to employ tactics to win with what they already have on hand or they're going to lose the East entirely.

# ? May 26, 2022 23:10

Owling Howl: Jul 17, 2019

Crosby B. Alfred posted:

This is a big deal. I guess maybe they'll re-take Donbass and Crimea after all?

It's a weapons system that will enhance some capabilities. To what extent depends on how many systems and rockets they get, how well trained the users are, their ability to deploy and supply them, how efficiently they can locate and identify suitable targets and if Russia will be unable to destroy them.

There is no silver bullet or wunderwaffen that can turn the war around on its own. Well maybe nukes. But apart from that you need many capabilities in different areas to succesfully launch an offensive in a war like this. It helps of course but it won't change that much by itself.

# ? May 26, 2022 23:11

Charliegrs: Aug 10, 2009

Crosby B. Alfred posted:

https://twitter.com/RALee85/status/1529941404914524160?s=20&t=Eud-xKo2OpBlx4YCvkqifw

https://twitter.com/NatashaBertrand/status/1529939191378984988?s=20&t=Eud-xKo2OpBlx4YCvkqifw

This is a big deal. I guess maybe they'll re-take Donbass and Crimea after all?

That's all well and good but it sounds like the kind of system that will take quite a bit of training to get the Ukrainians up to speed on. It seems like every new weapons donation made to Ukraine is reactionary to Russian gains and I'm worried those gain will increase faster than Ukraine can effectively obtain and utilize these new weapons.

# ? May 26, 2022 23:12

FishBulbia: Dec 22, 2021

Zudgemud posted:

That is quite some contradictory bullshit phrasing you have there. Just say that Ukraine and its people will have to accept some form of negotiated end to the war that is not on their terms. If Ukraine and its people see any loss of territory as a loss then it will be a loss and treated as such domestically. Russia will claim "an end of the successful special operation" in any case that is not a full annihilation of the separatist republics and the Russian forces in Ukraine.

Getting status quo ante feb 23 would be a massive victory for Ukraine.

# ? May 26, 2022 23:15

OddObserver: Apr 3, 2009

Rigel posted:

huh, not long ago, like maybe a week ago we were hearing that the US was refusing to send long-range rockets because then if Ukraine beats back Russia they might be tempted to get too aggressive and start attacking deep into Russia.

Now its "gently caress it, give all the weapons that don't have wings".

Well, there is also this story:
https://www.pravda.com.ua/news/2022/05/26/7348789/
It cites a Reuters article --- but doesn't link it --- about how Washington gave a talk exactly about not beinf aggressive about counter-attacking "deep into Russia".

# ? May 26, 2022 23:16

sean10mm: Jun 29, 2005; It's a Mad, Mad, Mad, MAD-2R World

Charliegrs posted:

That's all well and good but it sounds like the kind of system that will take quite a bit of training to get the Ukrainians up to speed on. It seems like every new weapons donation made to Ukraine is reactionary to Russian gains and I'm worried those gain will increase faster than Ukraine can effectively obtain and utilize these new weapons.

My take is kind of the opposite: even US logistics are finite, and we're largely prioritized what made sense for the phase of the war Ukraine was in. It's about bang for the buck/ton/shipping container, not just what weapons seem rad.

# ? May 26, 2022 23:28

golden bubble: Jun 3, 2011; yospos

https://www.pravda.com.ua/rus/articles/2022/05/25/7348467/

WARNING: MACHINE TRANSLATION

quote:

- Tell us a little more about the tactics of their entry into the city. How long before the infantry movement does the artillery fire?

- Their tactics are unchanged. They massively process our positions with artillery, infantry, sometimes together with tanks, advance under cover of artillery. As a rule, the infantry suffers losses, retreats, then the artillery is turned on again, and again - two or three assaults on the infantry. Artillery works for four hours, then infantry assault, artillery for three or four hours, infantry assault. This tactic has been tested, it does them little good, but thanks to massive shelling, they can move forward - because they are destroying positions, trenches, buildings step by step.
....
Unfortunately, they have an advantage in artillery. They did not capture Rubizhne - they wiped it off the face of the earth. Where there used to be a city, now there is a lot of construction waste. They razed the whole city to the horizon, along with civilians, along with those who were obviously loyal to Russia. They don't care.

- You have already mentioned Rubizhne several times - as far as I know, you were one of the last to leave. What happened there, why did you have to leave the city?

- We were really the last to leave. For me, this is a painful topic, because there we held positions at the cost of human losses. Our work coincided with the infernal periods of May 9-10, when it was important for the Russians to report on the capture of Rubezhny. On May 9, they were unable to advance and, moreover, suffered heavy losses. If they usually lost 2-3 tanks and 20-30 people a day, they lost dozens of vehicles that day, and we didn't even count the infantry.

- And the 10th?

- And on the 10th, infernal artillery shelling began - from 500 shells per hour only on the small fortifications that we held. And so they bombed the whole line� One of the reasons (our exit from Rubizhne - UE) - were erased all the buildings that can be fixed. Because when the Russians realized that even tanks would not push us through - we repulsed many attacks - they called us aircraft with missiles.
....
The second reason - unfortunately, our neighbors, who were holding the right flank - and it was already out of town, in the woods - they left and forgot to tell us that they simply can not withstand such shelling. So the enemy took their position, and in a few days he came "behind us", and we, in fact, almost found ourselves surrounded.

quote:

We need to more or less close the sky - it's either serious air defense systems, or planes, fighters. I repeat: this is a war of artillery and aircraft supported by tanks. We now have fewer tanks, so far less artillery and ammunition for it, although our gunners are much more accurate, and this is not a compliment. But - to give you an idea of the ratio - for one of our projectiles, they produce an average of 20 to 50.

quote:

- The last question: officially the General Staff does not name the loss of Ukraine in this war, however, the other day President Zelensky shed some light on the situation, saying that in the east could kill up to 100 soldiers a day. According to your observations, is this figure underestimated or close to reality?

- I have no information on the entire line of contact, I am a field commander. But given the point where we work, and it is the fiercest, this figure is understated. If you look at the whole front, there are quieter places somewhere
�
I try to save my people as much as possible, but, first of all, I have to perform tasks. Believe me, our losses, unfortunately, are great. But this is a war, and we are defending Ukraine. We knew what we were going for.

TL-DR = The Ukrainian army can savage any assault from Russian tanks or infantry. But the Russians have enough dumb artillery to level entire towns and villages when they are supplied by rail. They need more ways to kill Russian artillery or more ways to cut off the rail links used by the Russians. But at least this means the Russians can't advance beyond their railroads, because the railroads are the only thing that lets them pull of their one functional tactic, bath the entire battlefield in artillery fire. They can't do dramatic breakthroughs because Russian artillery is carrying the entire Russian army.

# ? May 26, 2022 23:48

orcane: Jun 13, 2012; Fun Shoe

Keeping the war from spiraling out of control is a valid concern to some extent, on the other hand Ukraine has to be able and allowed to hit ruscist supply lines and bases in border regions if "Russia must not win" is taken seriously, or they will alway have a somewhat easy time to just regroup and resupply from within its borders (or borders they consider their own). Not like being able to send cruise missiles to Moscow, but the war will not be over faster if stuff like bases in Rostov or Belgorod or their precious Kerch bridge are considered off limits by Western supporters.

# ? May 26, 2022 23:59

Kchama: Jul 25, 2007

Saladman posted:

Yeah I�m on board with you, calling it "great" for everyone but Russia seems either ghoulish or more likely in this context, cluelessly or carelessly worded. Europe loses (many things are more expensive now), Ukraine super loses (economy torn to poo poo, tens of thousands or more dead by the end), Russia loses (economy takes a hit, isolation likely for a generation), Africa and the poorer parts of Asia and MENA lose (food much more expensive), etc. The US is the only country to benefit - and even there the only benefit is geopolitical, as normal people will see no real effect either way.

For Europe it�s very hard to tell cause and effect for how Europeans are affected by the war though since inflation was surging before, but this certainly didn�t help, with inflation running at like 7-9% right now, or even higher if you include increased energy costs.

This is just telephone gaming what was originally said. Agree or disagree with Warbadger, his original point was that specifically, the US helping Ukraine so much helps everyone in some way, and is 'great' for everyone but Russia in that regard. Trying to accuse him of saying that the war itself is great for everyone but Russia is an extremely laughably wrong misreading of his words.

# ? May 27, 2022 00:13

WarpedLichen: Aug 14, 2008

PederP posted:

The whole 'dig in and the war freezes' thing doesn't make sense:

1) There's a massive occupied area in the south which is far too large to fortify. Even if Russia takes Donbas (and they're quite some way from that still) and digs in there, there's territory stretching all the way to Kherson which cannot be held with the same amount of firepower and concentration of force.

2) Russia is the invader. Invading is expensive and has to end with an occupation at some point. They can't keep the current amount of forces in Donbas for years to come. It doesn't work like that. An invader can't just peace out like it was some Paradox game, when they're happy with territorial gains. Historical invasions that do not end up occupying the entire country or forcing a surrender end with failure.

3) The economic warfare against Russia - including the effects of public opinion in the west (which has effectively forced a lot of companies to not do business in Russia, even when sanctions would allow for it) - isn't the trivial matter that some try to depict it. The Ruble exchange rate is an incredibly poor metric for the state of Russian economy. Actually relevant metrics show a near collapse of the Russian economy. This alone makes it impossible for them to end this war in a manner that doesn't appease western public opinion.

Right now, Russia has only two options - fight on with spite and brutality to try and somehow open a crack in the hitherto ironclad Ukrainian will to resists, or give up and go back home. The latter would be a very hard sell at home and I am not sure Putin has enough connection to reality to realize it (whether that be from brain worms or sycophantic misinformation). So they'll fight on until they can't continue. The spite and brutality is on full display. I expect that to continue.

But this war is already lost for Russia. The only question is how much suffering, death and destruction they will inflict on Ukraine before they accept the defeat and abort the invasion - and how big a risk of total social and economic collapse in Russia Putin's insane war will end up causing.

I feel like your first point and your second point don't align. But that may differ depending on what a frozen war looks like to you. There technically isn't even a real war happening now, just a special military operation, so I'm not sure how much precedence applies. Do you consider the situation post 2014 a frozen war or not?

The war will defacto "freeze" if:
1. Russia and Ukraine cannot come to a mutual understanding of what peace will look like
and
2. Neither side is finding it advantageous to make serious offensives

The economic war is another front on which the Russians are being attacked, but like all the other losses Russia has taken so far, it hasn't been enough to move for surrender yet. Especially if Russia expects that the ostracization to continue to some degree after the war anyway.

It might be unlikely to freeze at the current lines, but I can easily imagine a future where no formal peace is declared because Putin is being stubborn and is still holding onto Crimea while leaving a stretch of scorched earth in eastern Ukraine nobody wants to rebuild or fight over.

In fact, that is probably what is most palatable to Russia, a settlement with the EU/US to end the tougher sanctions with a peace agreement not recognized by Ukraine because of a cessation of its territories.

WarpedLichen fucked around with this message at 00:24 on May 27, 2022

# ? May 27, 2022 00:19

Warbadger: Jun 17, 2006

Electric Wrigglies posted:

and to go further, I disagree it benefits Europe as declared by Warbadger. It is Russia's fault its gone sideways but it was in Western European interests to have the trade and energy with Russia it had. It does not benefit France or Germany to have all that trade wrecked, the millions of refugees spread through the EU and a potentially multi-year war situated in the food basket of Europe. Europe's standing in its own spears of influence (West Africa is what I know about most) is getting shaken. The Sahel was not a nice place to be anyway but food and fuel pricing has dramatically increased and the governments are scrambling to keep the power on in the cities and to stave of riots (they are already happening).

It's not in China's interests as bordering an unstable nuclear power embroiled in a WWI Germany vs France style conflict to its north rather than the pre-war/2014 stable Russia. India is in a tough spot of maintaining neutrality that is important to its own interests.

I would go as far to say that the US is one of the few places the war is great for. No own soldier deaths, distraction from internal gun shootings and other divisive internal issues, writing modest checks (nothing of the scale of Iraq/Afghanistan) to its own MIC, European powers embarrassed/compromised and subverted to US direction, significantly increased MIC spending across the board which will doubtlessly benefit the US above all.

On Russia, I agree with the above poster, Russia predicted/gambled that it would go like Crimea did (ie, sharp actions, little green men, rigged elections and a gut load of cash combined with a lot of supervision after to quell unrest ala Crimea/Chechnya) but they got their sums wrong and intelligence insufficient, resistance was far stronger and their military found wanting operating at a scale it had not done since Soviet times. Local resistance and improperly prepared troops and systems means reprisal attacks by Russian troops and leadership that furthered resistance and unified Western world grass roots opposition. In short, Russia has visited a disaster upon the world through hubris and megalomania. The same bullshit that seen the US go into Iraq in 2003 with broadly similar results (The invading country got stuck where it didn't want to be after only three months, world economy depressed, refugees in the millions, deaths in the hundreds of thousands because making a short sharp action followed by cash and supervision work is harder than it looks).

Pro-war is not Pro-Ukraine. Being anti-war is not anti-Ukraine. There is a macabre fascination with war but it is most assuredly absolutely disastrous for most people it touches.

If you actually bother to read the conversation, the topic was US aid provided to Ukraine being great for everyone except Russia, not the war. Which is why people took issue with his comment.

# ? May 27, 2022 00:29

mlmp08: Jul 11, 2004; Prepare for my priapic projectile's exalted penetration; Nap Ghost

Warbadger posted:

If you actually bother to read the conversation, the topic was US aid provided to Ukraine being great for everyone except Russia, not the war. Which is why people took issue with his comment.

I mean, this is what kicked off agreement and the comment that it�s great for pretty much everyone except Russia. To be fair to DandyLion, they acknowledge ghoulishness pretty clearly below.

DandyLion posted:

I have faith that despite likely a sizeable portion of the conservative apparatus in the US eventually shifting away from supporting Ukraine, the MIC will ultimately keep them in-line as they've got equally effective hooks in their representatives and won't want to kill that golden goose.

Right now as ghoulish as it is to admit, the US is winning so thoroughly on the world stage against russia that as long as Ukrainians are willing to fight and die to make war against russia there's no good tactical reason for the US to thwart that carnage or remove the sanctions until russia collapses entirely or is subsumed by a more rational actor like China. The longer the clock ticks the more russian military operators are killed, the less military equipment is left to russia, and the more fractured/hobbled their economy gets. I see talk of the war lasting months or even years now and I honestly can't even fathom what russia looks like after a year of this because its so apocalyptic in the lifestyle shift even the majority of russians grew accustomed to this last generation.

# ? May 27, 2022 00:41

Warbadger: Jun 17, 2006

mlmp08 posted:

I mean, this is what kicked off agreement and the comment that it�s great for pretty much everyone except Russia. To be fair to DandyLion, they acknowledge ghoulishness pretty clearly below.

What he said was pretty clearly in regards to support and sanctions, not the war happening in general. So long as the Ukrainians are willing to fight there's no reason for the US to thwart the Ukrainian war effort or pull out of sanctions. It wasn't up the US whether the conflict started and it's not up to the US whether it continues, after all.

Warbadger fucked around with this message at 00:59 on May 27, 2022

# ? May 27, 2022 00:57

mlmp08: Jul 11, 2004; Prepare for my priapic projectile's exalted penetration; Nap Ghost

People can read the quote for themselves, not gonna dwell on it.

SDO transcript dropped. Some context surrounding headlines on losses.

US Senior Defense Official posted:

So, for instance, we believe they've lost or rendered inoperable almost 1,000 of their tanks in -- in this fight. They still have a lot left available to them. But we -- you know, we think they lost nearly about 1,000. They've lost well over 350 artillery pieces. They've -- they have lost almost three dozen fighter -- fighter bomber fixed-wing aircraft and -- and more than 50 helicopters. But, again, they still have a lot of capability left to them, as we have been talking about.

They have committed, of their entire battalion tactical groups, their whole ground -- remember, they organize by BTG. So we're going to keep it at that unit. But, you know, more than 80 percent of their total battalion tactical groups are committed to the war in Ukraine. And that -- that's a lot. And I just told you right now they've got -- 110 are in there.

So they have put a -- they have invested an awful lot of -- of their hardware and their personnel in this fight. And they have -- and they have suffered losses. The Ukrainians have suffered losses, too. But the Russians have suffered losses.

We still believe, though, with all that, Tara, that they still have the -- a significant amount of the majority of their capability left to them. And earlier, when I was talking about the Donbas fighting and up in the northeast, there, that, you know, they're making incremental gains. They're gains, but they're -- but they're incremental, and -- and part of it is because the Russians do have superiority here in terms of the numbers of assets they can apply to this fight, both in terms of people and -- and equipment and weapons. And we just have to, you know, bear that in mind.

It's not to say that the Ukrainians have not been just incredibly skillful in fighting back. And of course the entire rest of the world is doing what we can to replenish their own expenditure of -- of systems and weapons.

# ? May 27, 2022 01:03

Moktaro: Aug 3, 2007; I value call my nuts.

cinci zoo sniper posted:

Your father in law could have been taken in to stand honour guard and represent his military base in volleyball.

Top Gun(ner)

# ? May 27, 2022 01:18

ummel: Jun 17, 2002; <3 Lowtax; Fun Shoe

Not sure if this was posted yet, but the fog makes TOS barrages that more terrifying. :nms:

It's drone footage but it's an artillery barrage.

https://twitter.com/DefenceU/status/1529715892803739648

# ? May 27, 2022 01:19

Ynglaur: Oct 9, 2013; The Malta Conference, anyone?

The US sending MLRS is a continuation of the strategy of "boiling the frog". Gradual escalation is a good strategy for NATO.

I'll go on record and predict that the US will be supplying F-16s by the end of the summer, and perhaps sooner.

# ? May 27, 2022 01:29

the popes toes: Oct 10, 2004

Tomn posted:

<snip> in fact, arguably this was the norm for most wars between great powers prior to, say, the Napoleonic era, as no great power wanted to commit completely to any single war lest a third party pounce on them in their weakness, and it wasn't uncommon for territory that was never occupied to change hands as part of the horse-trading in peace negotiations afterwards, even for the "losing" party to walk away with some territorial gains to help offset their losses.

This is Kissinger's headspace, in my opinion. All the "what the hell is wrong with Kissinger" (besides his rather tainted history) misses that point. He's stuck in the past, much like Putin, in an imperialist perspective, and hasn't been forced to realize that those "lessons" have little to do with a western world that has finally adopted a complete refutation of imperialism as having any legitimacy, as a practice, a philosophy, an excuse, or as an analytical perspective. That and he's a whore selling his past reputation for the highest bidder, which is also something diplomats in the past, like Metternich, were wont to do.

# ? May 27, 2022 01:30

downout: Jul 6, 2009

Edgar Allen Ho posted:

It's not even recognizable as Zelenskiy. It looks like a generic caricature of a shifty mediterranean/jew/arab/etc. Why does he have enormous moobs?

I honestly thought it was the german chancellor(?) or someone. I'm more familiar with Zelenskyy's face and yet still went with a random other EU leader because it never crossed my mind to be Zelenskyy. Well done bad comic I guess?!?

# ? May 27, 2022 01:38

Giodo!: Oct 29, 2003

Ukrainian volunteer fighters in the east feel abandoned

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/05/26/ukraine-frontline-russia-military-severodonetsk/

quote:

Stuck in their trenches, the Ukrainian volunteers lived off a potato per day as Russian forces pounded them with artillery and Grad rockets on a key eastern front line. Outnumbered, untrained and clutching only light weapons, the men prayed for the barrage to end — and for their own tanks to stop targeting the Russians.

“They [Russians] already know where we are, and when the Ukrainian tank shoots from our side it gives away our position,” said Serhi Lapko, their company commander, recalling the recent battle. “And they start firing back with everything — Grads, mortars.
“And you just pray to survive."

Ukrainian leaders have projected and nurtured a public image of military invulnerability — of their volunteer and professional forces triumphantly standing up to the Russian onslaught. Videos of assaults on Russian tanks or positions are posted daily on social media. Artists are creating patriotic posters, billboards and T-shirts. The postal service even released stamps commemorating the sinking of a Russian warship in the Black Sea.

Ukrainian forces have succeeded in thwarting Russian efforts to seize Kyiv and Kharkiv and have scored battlefield victories in the east. But the experience of Lapko and his group of volunteers offers a rare and more realistic portrait of the conflict and Ukraine’s struggle to halt the Russian advance in parts of Donbas. Ukraine, like Russia, has provided scant information about deaths, injuries or losses of military equipment. But after three months of war, this company of 120 men is down to 54 because of deaths, injuries and desertions.

The volunteers were civilians before Russia invaded on Feb. 24, and they never expected to be dispatched to one of the most dangerous front lines in eastern Ukraine. They quickly found themselves in the crosshairs of war, feeling abandoned by their military superiors and struggling to survive.

“Our command takes no responsibility,” Lapko said. “They only take credit for our achievements. They give us no support.”

When they could take it no longer, Lapko and his top lieutenant, Vitaliy Khrus, retreated with members of their company this week to a hotel away from the front. There, both men spoke to The Washington Post on the record, knowing they could face a court-martial and time in military prison.

“If I speak for myself, I’m not a battlefield commander,” he added. “But the guys will stand by me, and I will stand by them till the end.”

The volunteers’ battalion commander, Ihor Kisileichuk, did not respond to calls or written questions from The Post in time for publication, but he sent a terse message late Thursday saying: “Without this commander, the unit protects our land,” in an apparent reference to Lapko. A Ukrainian military spokesman declined immediate comment, saying it would take “days” to provide a response.

“War breaks people down,” said Serhiy Haidai, head of the regional war administration in Luhansk province, acknowledging many volunteers were not properly trained because Ukrainian authorities did not expect Russia to invade. But he maintained that all soldiers are taken care of: “They have enough medical supplies and food. The only thing is there are people that aren’t ready to fight.”

But Lapko and Khrus’s concerns were echoed recently by a platoon of the 115th Brigade 3rd Battalion, based nearby in the besieged city of Severodonetsk. In a video uploaded to Telegram on May 24, and confirmed as authentic by an aide to Haidai, volunteers said they will no longer fight because they lacked proper weapons, rear support and military leadership.

“We are being sent to certain death,” said a volunteer, reading from a prepared script, adding that a similar video was filmed by members of the 115th Brigade 1st Battalion. “We are not alone like this, we are many."

Ukraine’s military rebutted the volunteers’ claims in their own video posted online, saying the “deserters” had everything they needed to fight: “They thought they came for a vacation,” one service member said. “That’s why they left their positions.”

Hours after The Post interviewed Lapko and Khrus, members of Ukraine’s military security service arrived at their hotel and detained some of their men, accusing them of desertion.

The men contend that they were the ones who were deserted.

Waiting to die

Before the invasion, Lapko was a driller of oil and gas wells. Khrus bought and sold power tools. Both lived in the western city of Uzhhorod and joined the territorial defense forces, a civilian militia that sprung up after the invasion.

Lapko, built like a wrestler, was made a company commander in the 5th Separate Rifle Battalion, in charge of 120 men. The similarly burly Khrus became a platoon commander under Lapko. All of their comrades were from western Ukraine. They were handed AK-47 rifles and given training that lasted less than a half-hour.

We shot 30 bullets and then they said, ‘You can’t get more; too expensive,’ ” Lapko said.

They were given orders to head to the western city of Lviv. When they got there, they were ordered to go south and then east into Luhansk province in Donbas, portions of which were already under the control of Moscow-backed separatists and are now occupied by Russian forces. A couple dozen of his men refused to fight, Lapko said, and they were imprisoned.

The ones who stayed were based in the town of Lysychansk. From there, they were dispatched to Toshkivka, a front-line village bordering the separatist areas where the Russian forces were trying to advance. They were surprised when they got the orders.

“When we were coming here, we were told that we were going to be in the third line on defense,” Lapko said. “Instead, we came to the zero line, the front line. We didn’t know where we were going.”

The area has become a focal point of the war, as Moscow concentrates its military might on capturing the region. The city of Severodonetsk, near Lysychansk, is surrounded on three sides by Russian forces. Over the weekend, they destroyed one of three bridges into the city, and they are constantly shelling the other two. Ukrainian troops inside Severodonetsk are fighting to prevent the Russians from completely encircling the city.

When the volunteers first arrived, their rotations in and out of Toshkivka lasted three or four days. As the war intensified, they stayed for a week minimum, sometimes two. “Food gets delivered every day except for when there are shellings or the situation is bad,” Khrus said.

And in recent weeks, he said, the situation has gotten much worse. When their supply chains were cut off for two days by the bombardment, the men were forced to make do with a potato a day.

They spend most days and nights in trenches dug into the forest on the edges of Toshkivka or inside the basements of abandoned houses. “They have no water, nothing there,” Lapko said. “Only water that I bring them every other day.”

It’s a miracle the Russians haven’t pushed through their defensive line in Toshkivka, Khrus said as Lapko nodded. Besides their rifles and hand grenades, the only weapons they were given were a handful of rocket-propelled grenades to counter the well-equipped Russian forces. And no one showed Lapko’s men how to use the RPGs.

The situation is controllable but difficult,” Khrus said. “And when the heavy weapons are against us, we don’t have anything to work with. We are helpless.”
Behind their positions, Ukrainian forces have tanks, artillery and mortars to back Lapko’s men and other units along the front. But when the tanks or mortars are fired, the Russians respond with Grad rockets, often in areas where Lapko’s men are taking cover. In some cases, his troops have found themselves with no artillery support.

This is, in part, because Lapko has not been provided a radio, he said. So there’s no contact with his superiors in Lysychansk, preventing him from calling for help.

The men accuse the Russians of using phosphorous bombs, incendiary weapons that are banned by international law if used against civilians.

“It explodes at 30 to 50 meters high and goes down slowly and burns everything,” Khrus said.

“Do you know what we have against phosphorous?” Lapko asked. “A glass of water, a piece of cloth to cover your mouth with!”

Both Lapko and Khrus expect to die at the front. That is why Lapko carries a pistol.

“It’s just a toy against them, but I have it so that if they take me I will shoot myself,” he said.

Survival

Despite the hardships, his men have fought courageously, Lapko said. Pointing at Khrus, he declared: “This guy here is a legend, a hero.” Khrus and his platoon, his commander said, have killed more than 50 Russian soldiers in close-up battles.
In a recent clash, he said, his men attacked two Russian armored vehicles carrying about 30 soldiers, ambushing them with grenades and guns.

“Their mistake was not to come behind us,” Lapko said. “If they would have done that, I wouldn’t be talking to you here now.”

Lapko has recommended 12 of his men for medals of valor, including two posthumously.

The war has taken a heavy toll on his company — as well as on other Ukrainian forces in the area. Two of his men were killed, among 20 fatalities in the battalion as a whole, and “many are wounded and in recovery now,” he said.

Then there are those who are traumatized and have not returned.

“Many got shell shock. I don’t know how to count them,” Lapko said.

The casualties here are largely kept secret to protect morale among troops and the general public.
“On Ukrainian TV we see that there are no losses,” Lapko said. “There’s no truth.”

Most deaths, he added, were because injured soldiers were not evacuated quickly enough, often waiting as long as 12 hours for transport to a military hospital in Lysychansk, 15 miles away. Sometimes, the men have to carry an injured soldier on a stretcher as far as two miles on foot to find a vehicle, Lapko said. Two vehicles assigned to his company never arrived, he said, and are being used instead by people at military headquarters.

“If I had a car and was told that my comrade is wounded somewhere, I’d come anytime and get him,” said Lapko, who used his own beat-up car to travel from Lysychansk to the hotel. “But I don’t have the necessary transport to get there.”

Retreat

Lapko and his men have grown increasingly frustrated and disillusioned with their superiors. His request for the awards has not been approved. His battalion commander demanded that he send 20 of his soldiers to another front line, which meant that he couldn’t rotate his men out from Toshkivka. He refused the order.

The final affront arrived last week when he arrived at military headquarters in Lysychansk after two weeks in Toshkivka. His battalion commander and team had moved to another town without informing him, he said, taking food, water and other supplies.
“They left us with no explanation,” Lapko said. “I think we were sent here to close a gap and no one cares if we live or die.”

So he, Khrus and several members of their company drove the 60 miles to Druzhkivka to stay in a hotel for a few days. “My guys wanted to wash themselves for the first time in a month,” Lapko said. “You know, hygiene! We don’t have it. We sleep in basements, on mattresses with rats running around.”
He and his men insisted that they want to return to the front.

“We’re ready to fight and we will keep on fighting,” Lapko said. “We will protect every meter of our country — but with adequate commandments and without unrealistic orders. I took an oath of allegiance to the Ukrainian people. We’re protecting Ukraine and we won’t let anyone in as long as we’re alive.”
But on Monday, Ukraine’s military security services arrived at the hotel and took Khrus and other members of his platoon to a detention center for two days, accusing them of desertion. Lapko was stripped of his command, according to an order reviewed by The Post. He is being held at the base in Lysychansk, his future uncertain.

Reached by phone Wednesday, he said two more of his men had been wounded on the front line.

“We had no proper training,” Lapko said.
“It’s around four RPGs for 15 men,” Khrus said, shaking his head.

The Russians, he said, are deploying tanks, infantry fighting vehicles, Grad rockets and other forms of artillery — when they try to penetrate the forest with ground troops or infantry vehicles, they can easily get close enough “to kill.”

# ? May 27, 2022 01:55

Deteriorata: Feb 6, 2005

Another dawn is breaking in Kyiv, and it's still Ukrainian. :unsmith:

# ? May 27, 2022 02:58

golden bubble: Jun 3, 2011; yospos

Giodo! posted:

Ukrainian volunteer fighters in the east feel abandoned

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/05/26/ukraine-frontline-russia-military-severodonetsk/

I can understand why. The one tactic the Russians are good at is to do a WW1 style bombardment to try and level everything. Being on the other end of that sucks, even if you win. There's nothing you can do but to stand there and take it and hope they don't manage a direct hit on the one trench you are in.

# ? May 27, 2022 03:05

Neorxenawang: Jun 9, 2003

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/may/26/filtration-and-forced-deportation-mariupol-survivors-on-the-lasting-terrors-of-russias-assault

I haven't seen this posted here, so apologies if it has been already.... The Guardian has a really harrowing piece on a relatively lucky couple that went through Russia's filtration camps out of Mariupol.

# ? May 27, 2022 03:11

Mr. Apollo: Nov 8, 2000

Uhhh�

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/western-nations-sanctions-russia-oligarchs-money-1.6467318

quote:

Western countries considering whether to let Russian oligarchs buy relief from sanctions

Money would be used to help rebuild Ukraine, say government officials who spoke to The Associated Press

Western allies are considering allowing Russian oligarchs to buy their way out of sanctions and using the money to rebuild Ukraine, according to government officials familiar with the matter.

Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland proposed the idea at a G7 finance ministers' meeting in Germany last week.

Freeland raised the issue after oligarchs spoke to her about it, one official said. The minister knows some Russian oligarchs from her time as a journalist in Moscow.

The official said the Ukrainians were aware of the discussions. The official said it's also in the West's interests to have prominent oligarchs disassociate themselves from Russian President Vladimir Putin, while at the same time providing funding for Ukraine.

"We would not be talking about this if there wasn't some comfort on the part of the Ukrainians," the official said. "We need to know that it works for them, too."

The officials spoke on condition of anonymity as they were not authorized to speak publicly about internal G7 discussions.

Only an idea so far

The proposal was raised in the context of providing additional money to Ukraine, and how the frozen funds and assets of oligarchs could be a source of funding.

At this point, it is just an idea, the official said, but Western allies have expressed interest. European Union officials have talked about the need to look at different and new avenues for confiscating assets and providing money to Ukraine.

The proposal could help remove a legal hurdle for authorities in countries such as Germany, where the bar for confiscating frozen assets is very high. By voluntarily giving up a share of their fortune abroad, oligarchs would save Western governments the potential embarrassment of being rebuffed by their own courts.

Western countries have imposed a raft of sanctions on oligarchs in response to Russia's invasion of Ukraine. Many of their multibillion-dollar fortunes are intertwined with the West, from investments in Silicon Valley startups to British Premier League soccer teams.

Former Chelsea owner Roman Abramovich, who was sanctioned over his links to Putin, has said that net proceeds from the sale of the soccer team would be donated to victims of the war in Ukraine. A deal to sell the soccer club has dragged on as the British government makes sure that Abramovich does not profit from the enforced sale.

The British government this week approved the sale of Chelsea to a consortium fronted by a part-owner of the Los Angeles Dodgers. Chelsea has been operating under a government licence that expires on May 31 since Abramovich's assets were frozen in March.

Asset freezes imposed on more than 1,000 people

The EU has imposed asset freezes and travel bans on more than 1,000 people, including more than 30 oligarchs, in response to Russia's invasion of Ukraine on Feb. 24.

Almost 10 billion euros ($10.7 billion US) in assets have been frozen by EU countries so far, according to the European Commission. It has established a "Freeze and Seize" task force to coordinate the enforcement of what are unprecedented EU penalties against Russia.

A 2017 study of Russian oligarchs published by the U.S.-based National Economic Bureau estimated that as much as $800 billion US is held by wealthy Russians in the United Kingdom, Switzerland, Cyprus and other offshore banking centres.

That vast fortune, held by a few hundred ultra-rich individuals, is roughly equal to the wealth of the rest of Russia's 144 million people.

Some oligarchs have also obtained dual citizenship in Britain and other Western countries.

The family fortunes of many of Russia's billionaires date back to the 1990s, the turbulent decade after the fall of the Soviet Union. Under the notoriously corrupt presidency of Boris Yeltsin, state-controlled assets such as oil refineries, steel mills, aluminum smelters and tractor factories were gobbled up by the politically influential, and were often purchased with the aid of government-backed loans.

Freeland is of Ukrainian heritage and wrote a book about it.

Hitting oligarchs financially hits Putin as well � and not just because it might diminish the support of Russia's financially privileged for Putin, said Alex Finley, a former CIA officer who tracks the impact of sanctions on Russian oligarchs.

Putin is too cagey to keep his considerable wealth in bank accounts or even family bank accounts, Russia experts say.

"A lot of these guys are his wallet," Finley said of the Russian oligarchs. "They help with laundering his money, laundering their own money, and yachts and other assets are places to hold that money."

# ? May 27, 2022 04:20

mutata: Mar 1, 2003

Russian oligarchs can get out of sanctions if they pay 99% of all their assets to unlock them.

# ? May 27, 2022 04:55

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Jun 4, 2024 03:32

Koos Group: Mar 6, 2013

mlmp08 posted:

People can read the quote for themselves, not gonna dwell on it.

SDO transcript dropped. Some context surrounding headlines on losses.

Please link a source when quoting something like this.

# ? May 27, 2022 04:56

The Something Awful Forums > Archives > Comedy Goldmine > The Goodmine > READ OP! War in Ukraine: a distressed blender making too many margaritas at once

«‹›2023 »