|
Rigel posted:This "2nd shot at Kyiv" idea is not being taken seriously because it would be catastrophically stupid. It would go much worse now than it did back in February, now that Ukraine is better trained and armed. Everything of any value or significance sent down would be lit up by HIMARS. While this is true, it must be said that the first shot at Kyiv was catastrophically stupid as well and yet it happened... But in all seriousness I dunno that Lukashenko actually DOES gain anything from jumping off the fence - if Putin is truly politically doomed (and it's hard to say whether he is or isn't right now), Belarus's intervention isn't going to tip the scales in his favor, and he's probably better off protecting and cultivating his own internal support (read: not meatgrindering his army and security forces in Ukraine) than trying to rely on Putin's increasing lack of influence to protect him. Like, if it's gotten to the point where Belarus is the difference between Putin falling or not, then Lukashenko doesn't NEED Putin anymore.
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2022 22:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 21:01 |
|
|
FishBulbia posted:Would you be able to "catch" a suicide drone by putting fishing nets around a target? https://maritime.org/doc/netsandbooms/index.php
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2022 23:01
|
|
|
Antigravitas posted:It's much more likely that Russia is just plundering Belorussian depots and shipping all that materiel east. I figure Russia told Belarus to house, feed and train some newly mobilized troops because Russia doesn't have the capacity to handle mobililzation or the personnel to train them due to losses and then they decided to hint at a second Kyiv offensive to make Ukraine redeploy forces from other fronts. However, Russia has made spectacularly dumb decisions during this conflict so it can't be entirely ruled out. I suppose it's possible the Russian MOD believes Ukraine is stretched thin and opening another front will enable a breakthrough.
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2022 23:19
|
|
|
Sucrose posted:What? Do they mean he had a heart attack and was found slumped over a fence, or that this guy had hanged himself or was hanged? he died of his heart stopping is sort of a euphemism for 'don't know, don't care, don't ask'
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2022 23:20
|
|
|
Owling Howl posted:I figure Russia told Belarus to house, feed and train some newly mobilized troops because Russia doesn't have the capacity to handle mobililzation or the personnel to train them due to losses and then they decided to hint at a second Kyiv offensive to make Ukraine redeploy forces from other fronts. Also, maybe some army commanders decided that Belarus would be a convenient place for mobilised sons of wealthy Russians who are willing to make a donation to ensure that their sons aren't sent straight to Ukraine but are stationed in Belarus for the time being.
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2022 23:30
|
|
|
Orthanc6 posted:I haven't seen much reaction to these moves, I feel leaders should be speaking up more to deter this. Maybe there's just a lot going on, if anyone has recent statements from major players I'd like to see it. I read them as Russia trying to get better control over lukashenko, not so much Ukraine. Maybe a feint, maybe training, but Belarussia can't hop towards independence or a revolution with a russian army in it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2022 23:32
|
|
|
I hope this isn't veering into Clancychat and if it is I'll demur, but I'm genuinely curious: if Belarus becomes an active belligerent, does that change the political situation enough so that e.g. Poland or another country might use direct military action against Belarus? I just don't know enough about Eastern European political norms.
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2022 23:35
|
|
|
cinci zoo sniper posted:Also, a military commissar was found hanging off a fence, having passed away due to his heart stopping. In a cruel twist of fate, that happened in the city of Partizansk no less. https://t.me/partizansk_go/9984 You could have suspected that the lurid fragging stories were going to start rolling in but dying on the fence in a place called partisansk puts him at risk of being made a holy martyr to the centrist movement Rigel posted:This "2nd shot at Kyiv" idea is not being taken seriously because it would be catastrophically stupid. That never stopped russia before, so it's all still on the table
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2022 23:38
|
|
|
Sucrose posted:What? Do they mean he had a heart attack and was found slumped over a fence, or that this guy had hanged himself or was hanged? There were already a bunch of reports that he was found hanging when izvestiya.ru posted a solemn note saying that a brave warrior's heart stopped without going into vulgar details.
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2022 23:49
|
|
|
Ynglaur posted:I hope this isn't veering into Clancychat and if it is I'll demur, but I'm genuinely curious: if Belarus becomes an active belligerent, does that change the political situation enough so that e.g. Poland or another country might use direct military action against Belarus? I just don't know enough about Eastern European political norms. What would Poland, Lithuania or Latvia actually gain from starting a war in which NATO wouldn't be helping them? Or from letting a third country from doing so through their territory?
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2022 23:53
|
|
|
Ynglaur posted:I hope this isn't veering into Clancychat and if it is I'll demur, but I'm genuinely curious: if Belarus becomes an active belligerent, does that change the political situation enough so that e.g. Poland or another country might use direct military action against Belarus? I just don't know enough about Eastern European political norms. This is kind of what I'm wondering, though I imagine military action against Belarus by someone not Ukraine is much less likely than Belarus attacking in the first place. That said, a strong response by other nations that does physically deter Belarus is needed, which is what I'm really wondering about. I'd say this isn't Clancy, because Belarus is using the threat of invasion right now as a political tool, and we need to be able to discuss and asses possible reactions to that, whether they invade or not. It might be a low chance, but the odds get worse the more troops Belarus moves to the border. I agree it would be a dumb move in that it is both very unlikely to succeed, and very likely to backfire. And I think Lukashenko knows both of those, but again, Russia made similar obvious errors starting this war in the first place. Possible grey zone would be Poland sending in troops to help defend the Belarus border if they do invade. Russia will of course whine and escalate, but I don't think it's a good precedent to let them start a 2v1 war uncontested.
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2022 23:57
|
|
|
Orthanc6 posted:This is kind of what I'm wondering, though I imagine military action against Belarus by someone not Ukraine is much less likely than Belarus attacking in the first place. That said, a strong response by other nations that does physically deter Belarus is needed, which is what I'm really wondering about. We already have troops reinforcing the Belarus border thanks to our stupid reply to Lukaszenkos migrant policies, where we send the Army to stop migrants put on buses by him from entering our courtry. So the reason is wrong on so many levels, but the troops are there.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2022 00:00
|
|
|
Kikas posted:We already have troops reinforcing the Belarus border thanks to our stupid reply to Lukaszenkos migrant policies, where we send the Army to stop migrants put on buses by him from entering our courtry. So the reason is wrong on so many levels, but the troops are there. I think they meant the Ukrainian-Belarusian border, i.e. putting Polish troops between Belarus and Kiev.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2022 02:16
|
|
|
Coucho Marx posted:I think they meant the Ukrainian-Belarusian border, i.e. putting Polish troops between Belarus and Kiev. Will Poland even have divisions left to spare after they retake Lwow?
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2022 02:28
|
|
|
Ynglaur posted:I hope this isn't veering into Clancychat and if it is I'll demur, but I'm genuinely curious: if Belarus becomes an active belligerent, does that change the political situation enough so that e.g. Poland or another country might use direct military action against Belarus? I just don't know enough about Eastern European political norms. What are you hypothesising the conceivable reason for them to do anything in that regard? Belarus becoming an active belligerent, which seems unlikely as of yet, wouldn’t change conflict in any practical way other than adding a questionable equipped, less than 50k strong, inexperienced military force, since otherwise their territory and resources were at Russia’s disposal already. Orthanc6 posted:This is kind of what I'm wondering, though I imagine military action against Belarus by someone not Ukraine is much less likely than Belarus attacking in the first place. That said, a strong response by other nations that does physically deter Belarus is needed, which is what I'm really wondering about. Speculating about NATO member state intervention against the Union State member Belarus, on the basis of no apparent change in the posture or behaviour of Belarus regarding this conflict, as Lukashenko has been moaning since February about the “need” for army to protect country’s borders with NATO, as a likely excuse for not committing any manpower to the war directly, is really out there if you ask me.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2022 02:38
|
|
|
Why would Poland send troops into Ukraine in response to Belarus invading Ukraine any more than they’d send troops in response to Russia invading Ukraine? That doesn’t make any sense.Pook Good Mook posted:Will Poland even have divisions left to spare after they retake Lwow? Lol, does anyone remember that map allegedly posted on some Russian TV channel showing how Ukraine could be erased off the map via partitioning by its various neighbors? Sucrose fucked around with this message at 03:06 on Oct 16, 2022 |
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2022 03:00
|
|
|
Sucrose posted:Why would Poland send troops into Ukraine in response to Belarus invading Ukraine any more than they’d send troops in response to Russia invading Ukraine? That doesn’t make any sense. Besides, while Ukraine goes to Poland, Belarus goes to Lithuania. Know your Union of Lublin, people!
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2022 03:12
|
|
|
cinci zoo sniper posted:What are you hypothesising the conceivable reason for them to do anything in that regard? Belarus becoming an active belligerent, which seems unlikely as of yet, wouldn’t change conflict in any practical way other than adding a questionable equipped, less than 50k strong, inexperienced military force, since otherwise their territory and resources were at Russia’s disposal already. My ill-formed speculation is that Poland would like to do more to help Ukraine, and that would provide an excuse to do so without bringing all of NATO in and startong WW3. I know little to nothing of Polish domestic politics, though, so if it's a foolish line of inquiry I'll drop it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2022 03:23
|
|
|
Ynglaur posted:My ill-formed speculation is that Poland would like to do more to help Ukraine, and that would provide an excuse to do so without bringing all of NATO in and startong WW3. I know little to nothing of Polish domestic politics, though, so if it's a foolish line of inquiry I'll drop it. I find this to be quite silly indeed. Poland may dislike Russia more than many other others, but their politicians are no less vulnerable to coffins coming home than anyone else is. Besides, doing this would likely mean a de facto loss of NATO collective defence for the purposes of facing a retaliation. If they want to help Ukraine, they can shut up about the cost of refugees, or send Ukraine more guns or money. Ukraine hasn’t been rejecting Polish aid as excessive as of yet.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2022 03:39
|
|
|
Antigravitas posted:Ah, so not state media then. And some really aggressive clipping that should make anyone suspicious. It's not as okay as you're portraying it. German "öffentlich-rechtliche" (could maybe be translated as "based on state/national laws") broadcasters aren't fully controlled mouthpieces of the government, but they're also not completely independent of the government. Their existence is constitutionally guaranteed, management positions are based on membership in political parties and they're financed by what amounts to a tax (fees that all citizens have to pay, regardless of whether they listen to / watch these stations or not). For these reasons, I think they can be more accurately be classified as "government-affiliated". Additionally, there's the matter of the selection of the news to report on. It's possible to run propaganda campaigns based on 100% accurate news by constantly repeating certain items, emphasizing some aspects of the context and so on. The talking point "Russia feels threatened by this" has been very common in Germany, and constant repetition lends it credibility. This item would fully fit in with that.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2022 03:53
|
|
|
Another dawn is breaking in Kyiv, and it's still Ukrainian.   
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2022 05:23
|
|
|
I wonder if the larger geopolitical consequences of the war is Russia losing influence in Central Asia to China, whilst India correspondingly grows more hostile - making the "middle corridor" land "belt and road" via the ex-Russia Trans-Caspian International Transport Route to European markets far more attractive to the maritime "belt and road", freeing up China also from increasingly costly investments in the Indian ocean periphery (the BRI has lots of routes proposed to Europe, China has been hedging its bets. There's a northern corridor (through Russia) and a southern one too (through Iran) but both are themselves ornery countries that would like to dominate their immediate neighbourhood; not good for business) Europe-led postwar reconstruction in Ukraine is likely to improve its rail infrastructure quality, which would resolve one of the problems plaguing this route (namely that it's possible to get to the Caspian but costly to get to Western Europe from there. Even after crossing the Caspian: Turkey has its assorted dysfunctions, Serbia is not an EU member, and Ukraine, well, Ukraine)
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2022 08:57
|
|
|
I don't know about India growing more hostile, they generally regard Russia as an important ally of convenience against China edging into their territory and for some weird reason a lot of Indians psychologically associate with Russia. China in the short term has taken a hit to it's investments, but you are right this is a long term boost to them as they can now bilk Russia for ever cheaper resources and face less competition for influence in the region. You're not going to see China annex some juice part of Siberia or anything, but there will be more and more economic exploitation in the region that unfairly benefits China.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2022 09:25
|
|
|
Also... climate change is melting the artic ocean. If China wants future routes to Western europe for goods, the answer is probably just around the top of russia. And since after this war russia will be desperate for external investment.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2022 09:41
|
|
|
It's quite straightforward to understand - Pakistan in SEATO, 1967 war with China, 1971 war with Pakistan, Sino-Soviet split, Shanghai communique - India spent much of the Cold War more powerful than or at least at parity with China, whilst China was but one node of a web of US allies encircling it Once upon a time it was India awkwardly backing an unexpected Moscow intervention to reinforce its imperial doctrine, rather than China. At the same time, India was then still sufficiently strong relative to its neighbours for this alliance to not really inflict any costs on its foreign policy independence There's a lot of resentment and denial in India of the magnitude of its relative decline of power (not entirely unlike France in NATO, once), due to the extent to which China has outpaced it rather than any particular mishap India ran into, aside from growth anaemia
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2022 09:45
|
|
|
Bug Squash posted:China in the short term has taken a hit to it's investments, but you are right this is a long term boost to them as they can now bilk Russia for ever cheaper resources and face less competition for influence in the region. You're not going to see China annex some juice part of Siberia or anything, but there will be more and more economic exploitation in the region that unfairly benefits China.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2022 10:24
|
|
|
Rappaport posted:Just to add to this for our American friends: A lot of European nations, like Germany, Sweden, Finland, etc., have state-funded television/media networks. They're supposed to be outside political control (I think this is a thing everywhere in Europe? Correct me if I'm being naive), but as one can imagine, it's not always a... Perfect system. That said, this is very different from a Russian-style state-organized and content-directed media apparatus, which is more akin to Goebbels's ministry of propaganda poo poo-show. There are two types of public German broadcasting. Almost all of it is organizationally and financially independent from the state and commonly called "öffentlich-rechtliche". But then there is also DW, which is a special animal and directly funded by the federal government and tasked with spreading pro-German viewpoints outside of Germany. They have nominally independent editorial control, but I wouldn't expect it. My point being, when you see German public media report something, check if it's DW or not cause that makes a difference.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2022 10:25
|
|
|
DTurtle posted:I think that the Russian attack has been a catastrophe for the mid and long-term prospects for China. It has (once again) shown the entire Western world that authoritarian countries can't be trusted. There already was a shift towards diversifying away from China (strengthened by the Chinese continued clinging to a Zero Covid strategy). This has now been accelerated even more. Billions and billions are already being invested into becoming less reliant on China. And more and more drastic measures are being taken to force companies to shift away from China. It's a boon for those factions inside China who prefer a less confrontational geopolitical strategy and a greater economic integration with the West. The 'patient party' so to speak, in regards to the Greater China situation. Xi was already facing mounting opposition to the very strict Zero Covid policies as you mention (although some form of low-tolerance policy is the alternative, not the laissez-faire of the west), anxiety over the economic situation and the suspension of the term limits. There will be those who think he should have kept Putin on a tighter leash and prevented him from weakening Russia and strengthening the America. In Europe the war has interestingly been a boon for both those who want Europe to prepare for the eventuality of a US president leaving Europe to fend for itself *and* those who want to improve/maintain the alliance with US. Those were until now opposing points of view dividing EU Federalists vs NATO oldschoolers - but now there is even (at least temporary) NATO support in some of the furthest left-wing parties, and European military integration support even among anti-federalist conservatives. The "peace dividend" and "let Russia have their way" factions have been greatly weakened. The pro-Putin conservatives are generally pro-defense spending, so they're not at all the same group as the peace dividend supporters (who considered war in europe farfetched and did not want military adventurism, so generally didn't see any point in military spending at all). I think it's interesting that the war has impacted the internal politics of Europe and Asia in ways that go beyond ideological lines - and I am sure we have yet to see the full repercussions of this, especially as how the war ends and what Russia looks like in the aftermath is going to form the basis of a rather massive realignment of global geopolitics. China would be crazy not to try and influence that outcome - Xi has a lot of challenges to navigate in the coming months and years, including this one. I think China still has many ways to benefit from the outcome, but there are also many ways to botch the situation.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2022 11:46
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/NTarnopolsky/status/1581585226710470656 About time. I wonder what sort of support this will be - Israel has a lot of missile defence systems and it would be poetic if these Iranian drones were completely neutralised by this
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2022 12:45
|
|
|
Chalks posted:https://twitter.com/NTarnopolsky/status/1581585226710470656 Iran is really determined to fight this war to the last Russian, huh.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2022 13:11
|
|
|
I wonder what Russia could offer to have Iran throw in with such a loser side.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2022 13:48
|
|
|
Feliday Melody posted:I wonder what Russia could offer to have Iran throw in with such a loser side. Iran is too isolated to throw in with anyone else, has spent under a considerably more restricted sanctions regime. Despite everything, Russia likely has quite a bit to offer them.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2022 13:56
|
|
|
Feliday Melody posted:I wonder what Russia could offer to have Iran throw in with such a loser side. A security council veto.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2022 13:58
|
|
|
Feliday Melody posted:I wonder what Russia could offer to have Iran throw in with such a loser side. Very worst case scenario is "canned sunshine" to put Iran in the big league, i hope very much it's something else. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2022 13:59
|
|
|
Chalks posted:https://twitter.com/NTarnopolsky/status/1581585226710470656 I imagine Israel’s MoD and defense industry are happy for a chance to field test their systems against Iranian weapons.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2022 14:00
|
|
|
He is not Israel's minister of defence, though. Not to mention that tweets are not official statement.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2022 14:06
|
|
|
Paladinus posted:He is not Israel's minister of defence, though. Not to mention that tweets are not official statement. Also they have yet another election coming up, don't they?
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2022 14:09
|
|
|
Feliday Melody posted:I wonder what Russia could offer to have Iran throw in with such a loser side. Additional training in and weapons for skull thumping
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2022 14:09
|
|
|
Chalks posted:https://twitter.com/NTarnopolsky/status/1581585226710470656 “There is no longer any doubt where Israel should stand in this bloody conflict.” ??? What doubt was there?
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2022 14:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 21:01 |
|
|
Israel really, really cares where Iranian weapons go, particularly missiles. To the extent that they'll fly into other country's airspace to blow up shipments, which they've done a number of times in the last decade.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2022 14:27
|
|