|
Everybody saying different things about the dragons teeth and how the tanks can or cannot handle them easily makes me think of the disagreements about tanks on the War Thunder forums leading to classified specifications getting leaked no less than 3 (and maybe 4?) separate times.
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2022 07:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 17:22 |
|
|
D-Pad posted:Everybody saying different things about the dragons teeth and how the tanks can or cannot handle them easily makes me think of the disagreements about tanks on the War Thunder forums leading to classified specifications getting leaked no less than 3 (and maybe 4?) separate times. There are ways to deal with them, and that depends on how well they've actually been deployed. If they're properly buried, if they have mines supporting them etc. But key point 1 is certain, they will slow an attacking force down, the question of "for how long" depends on a lot of variables even in ideal circumstances. And key point 1 leads to key point 2; slowing an attacker down is only useful if the defender is capable of taking advantage. Which given the state of Russia's forces is an open question as well. So yeah, lot of factors we don't know, we'll find out whenever Ukraine gets around to assaulting this position. Or you know, they might just go around or cut off supplies and make it irrelevant.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2022 08:24
|
|
|
Youth Decay posted:You know what wouldn't have any problem with it? Horses. Bring back the cavalry imo, it's time to go full Cossack on their asses. Are there many Ukrainian-loyalist Cossacks? My understanding was that a lot of the organized Cossack groups threw their lot in with the separatists in 2014.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2022 08:54
|
|
|
D-Pad posted:Everybody saying different things about the dragons teeth and how the tanks can or cannot handle them easily makes me think of the disagreements about tanks on the War Thunder forums leading to classified specifications getting leaked no less than 3 (and maybe 4?) separate times. While is in scare quotes because it depends on much resources an attacking force is willing to throw at them to clear them. Could be hours, days, or weeks but they're far from some sort've incredible tank busting defensive fortification. They've been around since at least WWII and sappers know how to deal with them. From the vids I've seen so far though it looks like the Russians aren't putting them in the ground properly. They've just laying them on top of the ground. They can't really work as an obstacle if they're like that.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2022 09:28
|
|
|
D-Pad posted:Everybody saying different things about the dragons teeth and how the tanks can or cannot handle them easily makes me think of the disagreements about tanks on the War Thunder forums leading to classified specifications getting leaked no less than 3 (and maybe 4?) separate times. I'm not sure what the disagreement is. Dragons teeth are fine as long as they are supported with infantry. But if you abandoned them, then the work of building them robbed you of more effort than the enemy will need to overcome them.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2022 09:47
|
|
|
Original toblerones along properly prepared defensive lines were also anchored to a solid concrete bed so it wasn't possible to drag them away with no effort. The Wagner line looks like they they did some landscaping for a bike path more than anything I'm sure these pyramids are fine for stuff like temporary checkpoints and other applications where you don't expect them to stop a tank offensive, but pretty much completely useless if you do. steinrokkan fucked around with this message at 10:04 on Oct 22, 2022 |
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2022 10:01
|
|
|
PederP posted:One could argue that the US providing intelligence to Ukraine is being a co-belligerent, but then you get into the whole deal about defensive vs offensive operations and who is the aggressor. This is something that has me so confused and angry about conflicts in general. Assisting a defending part in a war of aggression isn't escalation, that's containment. Shouldn't war be contained if possible?
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2022 10:03
|
|
|
Discussion on this topic appears to assume that the Wagner line's threat model is an armor offensive. Why is this believed to be the case? I was under the impression that Ukraine is more likely to field artillery-backed infantry with armor in a supportive role. Comparisons to WW2-era massed armor offensives, and the defensive preparations against such, do not seem appropriate to me. I agree with the point that these preparations will only be as good as their manning.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2022 10:21
|
|
|
Feliday Melody posted:I'm not sure what the disagreement is. Dragons teeth are fine as long as they are supported with infantry. They might be there for other than military reasons. Putin's daughter or someone in Wagner might have a friend with a cement factory and some room in their pockets.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2022 10:26
|
|
|
Ohtori Akio posted:Discussion on this topic appears to assume that the Wagner line's threat model is an armor offensive. Why is this believed to be the case? I was under the impression that Ukraine is more likely to field artillery-backed infantry with armor in a supportive role. Comparisons to WW2-era massed armor offensives, and the defensive preparations against such, do not seem appropriate to me. tanks to break through a line and then they try to rampage through russian back lines with more tanks and mechanized infantry literally driving through fields and roads with headlights off
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2022 10:39
|
|
|
Ohtori Akio posted:Discussion on this topic appears to assume that the Wagner line's threat model is an armor offensive. Why is this believed to be the case? I was under the impression that Ukraine is more likely to field artillery-backed infantry with armor in a supportive role. Comparisons to WW2-era massed armor offensives, and the defensive preparations against such, do not seem appropriate to me. Their infantry fights from IFVs, so that's still tracked vehicles. What use whatsoever would concrete field obstacles be against non-mechanized infantry?
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2022 11:03
|
|
|
It'd force the infantry to expose themselves to attacks while they try to clear the field of the obstacle. That's why ideally when you (properly) install Dragon's Teeth you'd also mine them. And have some sort've nearby force to watch the field and shoot at people who try to get close to them. If none of that is done and you have no one nearby watching the obstacle sure then a attacking force on foot can walk on through them like its nothing. Or they could just steal some local cars, hook up rope to their eyelets (since they weren't removed) and drag off those Dragon's Teeth if they aren't sunk into the ground. Like any defensive measure its only useful if you use it the right way.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2022 11:24
|
|
|
Ohtori Akio posted:Discussion on this topic appears to assume that the Wagner line's threat model is an armor offensive. Why is this believed to be the case? I was under the impression that Ukraine is more likely to field artillery-backed infantry with armor in a supportive role. Comparisons to WW2-era massed armor offensives, and the defensive preparations against such, do not seem appropriate to me. Kharkiv counter-offensive battle group, the force most apparently likely to threaten those fortifications, worked seemingly like this: 1) artillery “softens up” the annoying part 2) a tank battalion (20-30 tanks) goes in at full speed through the weakest part, with a swarm of special forces technicals orbiting it in the role of recon/skirmishers 3) 5-15 battalions of mechanised infantry follow in their IFVs, widening the breach and isolating pockets of resistance/setting overwatch up on flank routes against the spearhead 4) a light infantry ball of TDF, national guard, police, border guard, etcetera follows in their APCs, Humvees, etcetera, combing through the territory and taking care of stragglers, partisans, and other liberation “accounting” cinci zoo sniper fucked around with this message at 13:54 on Oct 22, 2022 |
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2022 13:01
|
|
|
Cable Guy posted:I'm interested in what the "Original Sin Problem" is... could you post more of the article if it goes into it please..? https://eml.berkeley.edu/~eichengr/research/ospainaug21-03.pdf the tldr is emerging (risky) markets are forced to issue bonds in other currencies, which increases their risk premium and adds additional contagion issues to their economies. PederP posted:But they're doing it retroactively, which is not something that is going to instill confidence towards Russia in the markets. the article explicitly argues the exact opposite of this. not only did bonds with a ruble payment escape clause have identical risk premium pre invasion, they have lower risk after the war. russia is also paying everything, regardless of contract, in rubles. and nobody is actually suing them over it. from a very high level, the war should actually improve confidence in russian bonds, because they have been insisting on paying them despite having the main carrot (access to capital markets) taken away.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2022 13:29
|
|
|
some sort of fish posted:from a very high level, the war should actually improve confidence in russian bonds, because they have been insisting on paying them despite having the main carrot (access to capital markets) taken away. Unless of course they're manipulating their currency value and printing it up to pay their debts. Then it would do the exact opposite even if in the short term it allows them to meet the letter of the contracts. In such a situation the contractors getting payed could be taking the payments only because they know in the future they'll be extra screwed and are "making hay while the sun shines".
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2022 13:39
|
|
|
cinci zoo sniper posted:Kharkiv counter-offensive battle group, the force most apparently likely to threaten those fortifications, worked seemingly like this: Well this is Ukraine, I can't imagine it would be hard to have a diversion such as destroying these teeth in enough different spots in short order that Russia wouldn't even know which one is a decoy -, likewise with the trenches. Considering that Ukraine has air forces and that this is 2022, the entire idea of a ground trap seems just silly, as the whole thing is already spotted and accounted for in data most likely.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2022 14:13
|
|
|
cinci zoo sniper posted:Looking at the truck hauling them on the video, assuming it’s a single layer of those inside, they seem to be about a yard tall overall - potentially buried just like you describe. I’ll try to find a bare one in full sight, if I can. Yeah, not going to stop a tank. Might stop a BMP, though. bird food bathtub posted:MCLC would turn all of it to useless rubble inside a few seconds that a tank could just drive right over and completely ignore. The Mine Clearing Line Charge is basically a long rear end string of explosives that gets launched out of launcher to make a long line of explosions that detonate mines and clear a path through a mine field. Don't know specifically if Ukraine has them but I wouldn't see them as being difficult to get. Vehicle mounted launcher if memory serves, so that would be the hardest part to get in to Ukraine's hands. Yep. The Russians use those to level cities. They have the additional benefit of throwing mines out of the way, at the cost of dealing with a bunch of unstable UXO later. Mr. Apollo posted:They left the lifting eyelets on them. Someone with a Jeep and a rope with a hook can probably remove them. That's why obstacles are considered all but useless unless they're under observation and fires. Even simple things are hard when you're in contact. Herstory Begins Now posted:You also see very, very few armored/military bulldozers, which is unusual for modern conflicts. Herstory Begins Now posted:they're building it at a brisk pace of about a kilometer a week Mr. Apollo posted:Could the Ukrainians use anti-tank missiles from a distance to take out the dragon’s teeth? Not a Javelin in NLAW, but something simple and cheaper like a M72. The downside is that High Explosive Anti Tank (HEAT) rounds don't like to be spin. Those rounds use an explosive to melt a cone of copper allow into a superheated, liquid penetrator. Because it's liquid, spinning it tends to break it up. The US and others preferred having HEAT over HEP, and so use smoothbore cannon. Ohtori Akio posted:Discussion on this topic appears to assume that the Wagner line's threat model is an armor offensive. Why is this believed to be the case? I was under the impression that Ukraine is more likely to field artillery-backed infantry with armor in a supportive role. Comparisons to WW2-era massed armor offensives, and the defensive preparations against such, do not seem appropriate to me. You raise a good point until the very end. This obstacle belt will cause lighter vehicles a lot of trouble, and Ukraine seems to use motorized forces very effectively. That said, obstacles 100% need to be manned--that is, under observation, to stop an attacking force. There is one notable exception, which I can state by experience: point obstacles, as opposed to linear obstacles, can disproportionately slow attacking forces compared to the time to emplace them. Because most obstacle effects require observation and fires, when an attacking force encounters an obstacle they may assume they're being observed and slow down. This can work especially well in low observation (night, smoke, etc.) in places the enemy doesn't expect to encounter an obstacle. I don't think that applies in the case of a linear, concrete obstacle like what we've seen, however. That belt is intended to block or divert motorized attackers, or disrupt mechanized attackers. steinrokkan posted:Their infantry fights from IFVs, so that's still tracked vehicles. What use whatsoever would concrete field obstacles be against non-mechanized infantry? Have you seen those fields? No light infantry wants to move on foot across a kilometer of open ground under observation. The dragons teeth won't stop light infantry, but great big fields of fire will. cinci zoo sniper posted:Kharkiv counter-offensive battle group, the force most apparently likely to threaten those fortifications, worked seemingly like this: notwithoutmyanus posted:Well this is Ukraine, I can't imagine it would be hard to have a diversion such as destroying these teeth in enough different spots in short order that Russia wouldn't even know which one is a decoy -, likewise with the trenches. Considering that Ukraine has air forces and that this is 2022, the entire idea of a ground trap seems just silly, as the whole thing is already spotted and accounted for in data most likely.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2022 14:49
|
|
|
notwithoutmyanus posted:Well this is Ukraine, I can't imagine it would be hard to have a diversion such as destroying these teeth in enough different spots in short order that Russia wouldn't even know which one is a decoy -, likewise with the trenches. Considering that Ukraine has air forces and that this is 2022, the entire idea of a ground trap seems just silly, as the whole thing is already spotted and accounted for in data most likely. Donbas has way too high concentration of Russian air defence for normal air force operations there, Ukrainian pilots have been doing for months the same thing as Russians do - use airplanes and helicopters as “dumb” artillery basically. Unless the diversion is delivered via like DJI drones, it’ll have to be a ground job in absence of Russian AD getting comprehensively deleted by like HIMARS fire.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2022 14:57
|
|
|
some sort of fish posted:https://eml.berkeley.edu/~eichengr/research/ospainaug21-03.pdf I don't agree that countries categorized as emerging markets are forced to issue bonds in other currencies. They often choose to do so, when they can, because it has many advantages. This isn't like some aspects of public policy where institutions like the IMF put a very real pressure on them to adopt specific policies. Countries are perfectly free to choose between issuing their bonds in whatever combination of currencies they like - when they choose a foreign currency it's a choice to piggyback on the trust that currency has in regards to stability. Countries that don't have the trust of international markets not being able to borrow in their own currency at the cost they'd like is a feature - not a problem. They're essentially asking other countries to fund their public expenses. They're perfectly free to use taxation and/or other monetary tools to fund it domestically. But if a country wants to get some of that sweet global capitalism, they're subject to the realities of those markets. An emerging market country issuing USD bonds will not pay a higher risk premium than if they issues said bond in their own currency. That's the whole point of issuing it in USD. They're suffering a variety of negative consequences compared to a hypothetical reality where they did not suffer from 'original sin' and could sell bonds in their own currency. If they have enough USD flowing into the country (like most petrostates do), they don't even have to shoulder a risk in regards to maintaining a stable exchange rate vs USD (as they can pay the coupon without having to buy USD in the market). Yes, countries that don't have this luxury will be subject to the pain of original sin - but again that's a choice, not something forced upon them. As for the Ruble - we're currently in a non-market situation. There is no liquidity. Right now being paid in Rubles is useless because you can't sell those Rubles. No international banks will touch them. That the current bonds are being serviced in Rubles is the only alternative to defaulting - and some actually do consider this a default. Nobody suing Russia is because there isn't really a point right now. Post-war that's going to change. Confidence in Ruble bonds? There's never any lack of confidence that a country can repay bonds in their own sovereign currency. The question is what premium markets will charge to agree to this (ie how they estimate risk of the currency changing in value). Noone is going to look at Russia after this war and go "gee, that's a low-risk business proposition" - because we've just had a year of Rubles being unsellable. The result might be emerging markets gravitating towards Rupees or Yuan (although the latter is highly contingent on China not crashing), because those currencies aren't under the control of the US. So if a non-aligned country can manage to instill a decent amount of confidence in their monetary stability it might allow them to become a sort of secondary global reserve currency. I think India may have a shot at this - but the USD is still going to be the primary choice for many emerging markets. It's a complete pipe dream by those who wish for a global financial markets to be less dominated the US and allies that the Ruble should come out of this stronger. Russia (and also Ukraine to a moderate extent) are going to come out of this facing a decade or more of being financial pariahs. If anything this war has shown the US to be more dominant than was previously thought - rather than the opposite. I get that a lot of people don't like the American domination in regards to global capitalism, but Russia is absolutely not going to be the country that makes even the slightest dent in that situation. They've just shown the entire world that pissing off the US means de facto defaulting on dollar bonds. That might eventually lead to more robust non-aligned economies gaining in monetary strength. Try and see if you can find anyone willing to make a bullish investment on the Ruble right now. That's the proof in the pudding. Even the countries that don't participate in sanctions don't want the Ruble. Why would they? Noone knows when it will even be liquid again. Russian officials and international cheerleaders pointing at completely illiquid exchange rates is just propaganda for those who don't understand that a price without a market is irrelevant. PederP fucked around with this message at 16:10 on Oct 22, 2022 |
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2022 16:05
|
|
|
cinci zoo sniper posted:Kharkiv counter-offensive battle group, the force most apparently likely to threaten those fortifications, worked seemingly like this: Thanks, makes a ton of sense. Motorized comes at the very end, after the obstacle is mostly irrelevant.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2022 16:57
|
|
|
Ynglaur posted:Yeah, not going to stop a tank. Might stop a BMP, though. What about the Swiss Army Knife of the Ukrainian Armed Forces, the tractor? Honestly, if they left the eyelets in, they'll probably be dragged off by Ukrainian militia during the night, when the Russians have difficulty operating in.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2022 17:45
|
|
|
take up your issue with whether they "have to" with the authors of the paper and economists using the term. certainly you can "choose" to not take any foreign investment that has worked out well for many nations im sure. you are empirically wrong: risk premium for foreign denominated bonds is always higher. you can quite literally open price charts and compute it. at a very basic level, you have much higher risk of getting literally nothing instead of a pile of near worthless paper. from a more detailed financial perspective, issuing a bond in a currency you do not issue must increase the risk premium on it. mechanically, there is no difference between a russian dollar denominated bond and a russian ruble denominated bond paired with a mark to market swap. it carries nonzero risk regardless of current balance of payments. the ruble stuff is arguing against things i never said, i used "confidence" and not "risk premium" for a reason. obviously a ruble is riskier than a ust and that is only going to increase. you are also overstating the liquidity issues. ruble trade is thin but its not decreasing. i can open up a terminal and unwind a ruble position via jp morgan or bofa by monday. to tie this back to the actual thread topic, this is mostly interesting because it suggests that russia won't stay frozen out of the foreign credit market when the current sanctions regime ends. it will be interesting to see if giving ukraine access to seized russian foreign currencies changes this.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2022 18:16
|
|
|
Angry Salami posted:Are there many Ukrainian-loyalist Cossacks? My understanding was that a lot of the organized Cossack groups threw their lot in with the separatists in 2014. Cossacks have been going through a lot of persecution and ethnic cleansing post 2014 along with all non ethnic Russians in crimea so yeah most of them at this point
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2022 18:23
|
|
|
https://mobile.twitter.com/peterbakernyt/status/1583816571876958208 I am not looking forward to the "world leaders" hugging it up with Putin in G-20.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2022 18:40
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/mhmck/status/1583851866127208448?s=20&t=sVuvlftI6Q4nMyGz43zWhg The Ukrainians themselves are saying the Russians are pulling out. Russia finally doing the logical thing they should have done 6 months ago. Instead, they piss away some of the best units they have left over that time period when they could have been used in the east.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2022 18:48
|
|
|
MikeC posted:The Ukrainians themselves are saying the Russians are pulling out. Russia finally doing the logical thing they should have done 6 months ago. Instead, they piss away some of the best units they have left over that time period when they could have been used in the east. If anything it kind of sucks that they're leaving, sitting there cut-off on the wrong side of the river was probably for the best, yeah
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2022 19:44
|
|
|
mobby_6kl posted:If anything it kind of sucks that they're leaving, sitting there cut-off on the wrong side of the river was probably for the best, yeah It's probably really good news for Kherson though, basically walking into a relatively intact city without much fuss would still be a huge win for Ukraine.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2022 19:58
|
|
|
MechanicalTomPetty posted:It's probably really good news for Kherson though, basically walking into a relatively intact city without much fuss would still be a huge win for Ukraine. It also depends how much heavy equipment they're able to evacuate with their troops. The biggest impact of these routs is the equipment loss rather than the troop casualties, so if Ukraine can capture a similar amount of equipment in exchange for next to zero losses on either side it would be very good, especially if you consider that most of the remaining troops are fresh conscripts anyway. They would be very easy to replace.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2022 20:09
|
|
|
^^^ We obviously haven't been hearing much but hopefully all the bridges are sufficiently damaged by now that they'll have to leave all the heavy gear there MechanicalTomPetty posted:It's probably really good news for Kherson though, basically walking into a relatively intact city without much fuss would still be a huge win for Ukraine.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2022 20:10
|
|
|
PederP posted:That is not quite comparable. The US is not sending military personnel into Ukraine to assist directly with the use of the equipment. Iran has personnel in Russia assisting with the use of the equipment - or according to some of the sources earlier in this thread - have personnel inside the internationally recognized borders of Ukraine carrying out this assistance. uh, what? https://www.state.gov/u-s-security-cooperation-with-ukraine/ quote:Since January 2021, the United States has invested approximately $18.3 billion in security assistance to demonstrate our enduring and steadfast commitment to Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity. This includes approximately $17.6 billion since Russia’s launched its premeditated, unprovoked, and brutal war against Ukraine on February 24. Since 2014, the United States has provided more than $19.6 billion in security assistance for training and equipment to help Ukraine preserve its territorial integrity, secure its borders, and improve interoperability with NATO. quote:In FY 2021, the Department provided Ukraine $115 million in Foreign Military Financing (FMF) and $3 million in International Military Education and Training (IMET) funding. Prior to Russia’s renewed invasion, FMF supported Ukraine’s acquisition of a wide array of capabilities including counter-mortar radars, secure radios, vehicles, electronic equipment, small arms and light weapons, and medical supplies, among others.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2022 21:09
|
|
|
MechanicalTomPetty posted:It's probably really good news for Kherson though, basically walking into a relatively intact city without much fuss would still be a huge win for Ukraine. Don't kid yourself. As soon as Russia evacuates--if they do--they will shell it into oblivion.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2022 21:12
|
|
|
The concrete pyramids may be meant to be anchored or buried, but the ones we have footage of are clearly just resting on top of undisturbed soil.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2022 21:28
|
|
|
Ynglaur posted:Don't kid yourself. As soon as Russia evacuates--if they do--they will shell it into oblivion. And booby trap the poo poo out of the place. I fully expect to see doors, food and child's toys with explosives rigged to them.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2022 21:44
|
|
|
some sort of fish posted:you are empirically wrong: risk premium for foreign denominated bonds is always higher. you can quite literally open price charts and compute it. Huh, opening a terminal and getting a quote is one thing - but please let me know what broker is going to take the Rubles sitting in the Russian National Settlement Depositary and trade those for some Euros or Dollars. I'm certainly open to being mistaken, but my personal observation is that noone wants to touch that even via a chain of intermediaries for fear of getting slapped for violating sanctions. I work in finance, and my impression is that anything to do with Russia (and in some cases also Ukraine) is a no-go. As for the first part - separating credit and currency risk results in a lower risk premium. Credit risk is the same regardless of the denomination. Issuing bonds in Euro or USD removes the currency risk from the buyer. That by definition will reduce risk premiums. Are you referring to non-sovereign bonds? For sovereign bonds, the risk for the buyer is lower if it isn't denominated in the emerging market currency. That's basic stuff. I am not sure why you are bringing mark to market swaps into this - it just complicates what is really not that complex - and swaps aren't free, hedging your currency risk is an additional cost, and is exactly the kind of thing which contributes to increasing the price of nationally denominated bonds relative to dollarbonds. Ruble trade is thin? The Ruble market is non-existent. There is no price mechanism at the moment. I'm not an economist but I work in the financial sector, I have economist among my friends and everything I'm told is that Russia is all but shut off from the international financial markets, and that the Ruble market is not there. You are painting a picture of the Russian economic prospects that is completely at odds with what I am seeing and hearing on a daily basis. In the interest of not having a boring shouting match, let's agree to disagree on the risk characteristics of national vs dollar-bonds (anyone interested in this argument can go look it up in a textbook or investopedia instead of having us argue). But I would like to hear how you can sell rubles by monday? That's not a rhetorical question. And while I'm ranting, right-wing media is fighting tooth and nail to paint a picture of the Ruble rebounding, of the dollar being challenged, of Russia having bright economic prospects after the war. It's nonsense. There's a reason the director of Russian Central Bank has tried to throw in the towel over and over. The Russian economy is in the dumpster. The Ruble is completely disconnected from the outside world. The Ukrainian economy has been hurt a lot worse, sadly, but the Russian economy - current and future - is mauled and is going to be a real problem for Eurasian geopolitical stability for quite some time. It's been smacked down every bit as hard as the Russian military. Rebuilding both will take time, and I'm skeptical they'll ever be the same in the eyes of the world within this generation. Sanctions work. Russia has defaulted on their sovereign debt (due to frozen accounts, but still). The Ruble is a non-currency.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2022 21:45
|
|
|
I like how they're doing it in the way which still requires a fuckton of equipment and work hours and deployment because even if they don't have the things needed to make this stuff effective they still have to show they did something so
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2022 21:46
|
|
|
SaTaMaS posted:uh, what?
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2022 21:47
|
|
|
Cicero posted:Okay? Exactly what point do you think you're making here? The US clearly has sent military personnel into Ukraine to assist directly with the use of equipment, and has been doing so since 2014.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2022 21:50
|
|
|
SaTaMaS posted:The US clearly has sent military personnel into Ukraine to assist directly with the use of equipment, and has been doing so since 2014. It’s incredibly disingenuous to compare pre-February 24 cooperation to that since then. Cut it out.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2022 21:55
|
|
|
Ynglaur posted:Don't kid yourself. As soon as Russia evacuates--if they do--they will shell it into oblivion. Kherson is ostensibly annexed Russian territory at this point though, it might be more difficult to claim that all the people there, 98% of whom voted to join Russia, are now nazis that must not be allowed to have electricity or heating.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2022 21:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 17:22 |
|
|
Storkrasch posted:Kherson is ostensibly annexed Russian territory at this point though, it might be more difficult to claim that all the people there, 98% of whom voted to join Russia, are now nazis that must not be allowed to have electricity or heating. Hence the evacuation, "We got all of the Russians out"
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2022 22:01
|
|
