|
The whole “threat” of NATO for Russia is that it means they can’t just attack/invade neighbors at will like what we just saw. Russian security guarantees are as worthless as a screen door on a submarine. Russia started an ill conceived war of aggression. They are going to have to deal with the consequences of their actions. I assume that Putin is being pushed by pretty much everyone that he needs to end this poo poo soon. We will see if anyone can get through to him that the conflict is lost and to drag it out more will just cost him more.
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2022 22:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 13:54 |
|
|
I'm totally fine with NATO giving Russia security guarantees, because it means nothing. No one is going to invade a nuclear ICBM armed power and everyone, including Putin, is already aware of this. If an empty gesture like that lets Putin claim a "win" to his people for his abysmal failure of a war than that's a small price to pay to stop the murder of Ukrainians.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2022 23:56
|
|
|
Herstory Begins Now posted:That defense ended because it was unsustainable. The bottleneck was clearly the Dnipro crossings......... Tuna-Fish posted:They had working railroad from Russia all the way to the front when that defense started, and built up stockpiles. After they started losing logistics and stockpiles, observers both inside their lines and outside noted that their volume of fire eventually fell to a fraction of what it used to be. Then they withdrew from the most important city they had captured without a fight. Source on the exact mechanics of this argument please. See above comment. The linkages involved are not the same.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2022 00:18
|
|
|
Bremen posted:I'm totally fine with NATO giving Russia security guarantees, because it means nothing. No one is going to invade a nuclear ICBM armed power and everyone, including Putin, is already aware of this. If an empty gesture like that lets Putin claim a "win" to his people for his abysmal failure of a war than that's a small price to pay to stop the murder of Ukrainians. It's a problem if the guarantees aren't reciprocal because that sets all kinds of bad precedents. If Putin isn't willing to put all the Iskanders in Kaliningrad pointed at every capital in Eastern and Central Europe on the table, why should he get any guarantees on systems placed in Ukraine?
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2022 01:05
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:It's a problem if the guarantees aren't reciprocal because that sets all kinds of bad precedents. If Putin isn't willing to put all the Iskanders in Kaliningrad pointed at every capital in Eastern and Central Europe on the table, why should he get any guarantees on systems placed in Ukraine? Because Russia is a second rate has-been power with delusions of the West jumping into the power vacuum they left, whereas NATO can defend itself and doesn’t require any guarantees. (At least, that would be the optics.)
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2022 01:23
|
|
|
MikeC posted:The bottleneck was clearly the Dnipro crossings......... The right bank of the Dnipro was probably unsustainable with the bridges getting taken out, However without inside poker on their logistic situation, it is hard to say whether the Kerch bridge exacerbated the problem or was a non-factor. They don't have another rail line there unless they have rebuilt that 15km of track this summer, and it seems unlikely they have done so. (Any actually know whether they have?) What is certainly true is that the left bank of the Dnipro has degraded logistics, just how bad is an open question as they have road and sea open.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2022 01:46
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:It's a problem if the guarantees aren't reciprocal because that sets all kinds of bad precedents. If Putin isn't willing to put all the Iskanders in Kaliningrad pointed at every capital in Eastern and Central Europe on the table, why should he get any guarantees on systems placed in Ukraine? For the same reason NATO isn't going to invade Russia, so the guarantee means nothing, Russia isn't going to invade NATO. Though a security guarantee from Russia would be doubly worthless because the whole situation with Ukraine is ample proof Russian security guarantees aren't worth the paper they're printed on.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2022 01:57
|
|
|
Bremen posted:I'm totally fine with NATO giving Russia security guarantees, because it means nothing. No one is going to invade a nuclear ICBM armed power and everyone, including Putin, is already aware of this. If an empty gesture like that lets Putin claim a "win" to his people for his abysmal failure of a war than that's a small price to pay to stop the murder of Ukrainians. I'm not because Russia pulls poo poo like claiming Ukrainian cyborg homonazis are about to attack Russia. When Russia demonstrates it can follow diplomatic agreements in good faith, then other nations can negotiate with Russia other than with the point of a sword.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2022 02:05
|
|
|
Bremen posted:I'm totally fine with NATO giving Russia security guarantees, because it means nothing. No one is going to invade a nuclear ICBM armed power and everyone, including Putin, is already aware of this. If an empty gesture like that lets Putin claim a "win" to his people for his abysmal failure of a war than that's a small price to pay to stop the murder of Ukrainians. Except Russian "security guarantees" are more about nobody jumping in against them if they decide to annex their neighbors.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2022 02:20
|
|
|
Remember that talk about Engels airfield with strategic bombers? Well... https://twitter.com/ian_matveev/status/1599657945096036353?t=Ttzl80NPgE8lEJIwEpKVqA&s=19 Russian TG channel Baza (Kremlin-affiliated, mostly reliable as an outlet airing leaks from cops) says it was a drone, two planes are damaged. fatherboxx fucked around with this message at 08:13 on Dec 5, 2022 |
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2022 07:57
|
|
|
hmmm... ukrainian drone infiltrates over 400 miles of russian airspace, some kind of special operation, or some poor benighted airman hosed up will arming a decaying cold war era warhead my guess is the latter, but none of them are exactly encouraging for the russians were there any notable american ordnance accidents during gulf wars 1 and 2? i have to imagine the american air force was operating at a higher tempo than the russians in both conflicts, though i guess for a shorter period. i know in vietnam a young john mccain almost took out an aircraft carrier when his plane did an oopsie and fired a rocket pod on the hanger deck
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2022 08:16
|
|
|
I wouldn't count out sabotage either, either from inside the base or with shorter range drones flying from outside base. I doubt we'll hear anything conclusive for a long time.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2022 08:27
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/walter_report/status/1599654381145595904 Apparently you can hear jet engines before the explosions so it would maybe indicate some kind of missile.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2022 08:59
|
|
|
A fuel truck at the Ryazan airbase exploded, 3 dead. They're going to have to keep cracking down on smoking on military bases. https://twitter.com/Tendar/status/1599662919414784000?s=20&t=c7_Ij6lRfH43UNjd_GFUfg e, Ka-52 being swatted out of the sky by an S-300, https://twitter.com/Tendar/status/1599678590043688961 mllaneza fucked around with this message at 09:22 on Dec 5, 2022 |
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2022 09:20
|
|
|
bad_fmr posted:https://twitter.com/walter_report/status/1599654381145595904 Sounds doubtful that whatever that unclear sound is is connected to the event, unless they fired the missile from right next to the microphone. You wouldn't hear it from a distance. That could just be wind in mike or a passing bus or anything. Also missiles generally use rocket engines, they don't sound so much like jet engines, especially the smaller ones. It might be a passing aircraft from the airbase, though. Or the Ghost of Kyiv?
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2022 09:20
|
|
|
bad_fmr posted:https://twitter.com/walter_report/status/1599654381145595904 It's just as likely that it was an accident when loading the bombers for another attack on Ukraine.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2022 09:32
|
|
|
Nenonen posted:
Cruise missiles usually use jet engines. It's just good sense to use air as the oxidiser if you're staying in the denser part of the atmosphere, that way you can carry a lot more fuel for more impulse.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2022 09:34
|
|
|
Jasper Tin Neck posted:Cruise missiles usually use jet engines. It's just good sense to use air as the oxidiser if you're staying in the denser part of the atmosphere, that way you can carry a lot more fuel for more impulse. Yes but it doesn't seem likely that Ukraine suddenly would have missiles of such range.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2022 09:47
|
|
|
spankmeister posted:It's just as likely that it was an accident when loading the bombers for another attack on Ukraine. Explosions the same morning in Engels and under Ryazan rule out the possibility of an accident unless there is a smoking timed challenge on tiktok
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2022 09:56
|
|
|
fatherboxx posted:Explosions the same morning in Engels and under Ryazan rule out the possibility of an accident unless there is a smoking timed challenge on tiktok Does it really? I wouldn't rule anything out at this point.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2022 10:04
|
|
|
Nenonen posted:Yes but it doesn't seem likely that Ukraine suddenly would have missiles of such range. They have been hinting at something with a 1000 km range and 75 kg payload for a while now. https://www.janes.com/defence-news/news-detail/ukraine-conflict-kyiv-teases-new-long-range-response-to-russian-suicide-drone-attacks
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2022 10:18
|
|
|
Tomn posted:One slight issue with NATO concessions, I feel like, is that after this war Ukraine is going to really, really want to secure SOME kind of security guarantee from other countries, and NATO would probably be the most secure form of guarantee available - even if they win this war outright and have the ability to win it again, I can't imagine they'd enjoy paying the price of this year's victories again. Finding allies to make themselves look too prickly for Russia to even attempt to try again in the future is likely going to be a top diplomatic priority. Of course, actual NATO membership is probably pretty unlikely anyways given the complexities involved in securing membership for Ukraine so from that perspective it might be considered a "free win," but I wonder if Putin is going to regard checks on NATO expansion purely as a face-saving exercise, or if he's going to actively push for a peace agreement preventing "Western influence" from reaching Ukraine, for which read "foreign security guarantees and treaties that might prevent Russia from trying again in the future." If the former, well and good, Ukraine can pinky-swear not to join NATO while signing agreements that ensure they'll have backing and assistance from NATO member states in the future (even if it's just guaranteed military contracts for supplies and equipment and such). If the latter, though, a peace in which Ukraine is left isolated to stand alone against future Russian aggression is not I think going to be considered much of a peace at all. Aren't we assuming that Ukraine will probably eventually join the EU? Is their common defense pact not worth much?
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2022 10:25
|
|
|
Does anyone have knowledge of what internal security in Russia with regard to movement between regions is like these days? If you can get inside the country in the first place, how easy or hard would it in theory be to move about? I could imagine a couple of saboteurs getting across the border (probably not the Russia-Ukraine one) with a truck full of explosives-laden cheap drones and then driving in the direction of a Russian airfield of their choosing, but I've no idea if that's the only hurdle to clear.Small White Dragon posted:Aren't we assuming that Ukraine will probably eventually join the EU? Is their common defense pact not worth much? Sweden and Finland are both in the EU already and still felt it was high time to get into NATO asap when this kicked off. Slashrat fucked around with this message at 10:33 on Dec 5, 2022 |
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2022 10:30
|
|
|
Jasper Tin Neck posted:They have been hinting at something with a 1000 km range and 75 kg payload for a while now. gently caress, recently I was wondering if France could potentially give some of their submarine-based 1000km cruise missiles to Ukraine, looks like they may already have some
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2022 10:37
|
|
|
Small White Dragon posted:Aren't we assuming that Ukraine will probably eventually join the EU? Is their common defense pact not worth much? Slashrat posted:Sweden and Finland are both in the EU already and still felt it was high time to get into NATO asap when this kicked off. To elaborate: Finland's official EU/foreign policy stance for a long time was attempting to strengthen (politically) the EU's common defense policies and practices, because for let's say historical reasons we were shy about NATO membership. This didn't really work out, because most of the EU was already in NATO and had very little interest in creating a parallel structure within the EU. And there's a whole host of historical and practical reasons why a EU-wide unified armed forces wouldn't really work out; for starters, what language would everybody use? English is... Awkward, from a purely EU perspective, and there's the French with their chauvinism, etc. And this is one of the more trivial political issues around the EU joint defense strengthening idea. But as Slashrat said, once Russia went full colonialist warfare on a neighbouring state, Finland (and Sweden) figured it was time to either poop or get off the pot. You can pick which one of those represents joining NATO, but that's the new geo-political reality.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2022 11:09
|
|
|
To Putin security guarantees mean anything Russia considers part of the Russian World.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2022 12:14
|
|
|
Macron never mentioned 'security guarantees' - he mentioned guarantees, and in a larger context. Everyone is getting their undies in a twist over a something he never said. A security guarantee is a very specific thing, and I don't think it was coincidence that a more generic and vague term was used. The entire conversation was focused on making sure Russia was not a position of feeling, or being able to claim being, threatened by NATO. Reuters did a hackjob of a paraphrase where they made it sound like he said something rather different. Just ignore that article - it's dumb and yet another example of words being taken out of context, twisted and the resulting headline being boosted to cause controversy.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2022 12:27
|
|
|
Regardless of what Macron intended to say or not, at a minimum Putin will not and cannot accept anything less than the Ukrainian land he has claimed as annexed. And unless something changes in their favor on the ground the Ukrainians are also in no way going to cede said land. While the Macron and the rest of NATO may be attempting to give Putin off ramps, I hope they are following that in backchannels between the two that NATO/US will only increase material support and start giving more long range strike capabilities to the Ukrainians if Russia keeps this up.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2022 12:41
|
|
|
Looks like there was another extrajudicial execution by Wagner. This time it's an LNR militia officer who might have been executed for his subordinates' desertion. https://theins.ru/en/news/257551 quote:“Today it's me, tomorrow another, that's all. We’re just murder material [to them]. The Ministry of Defense executes people. They know that we’re [dead men] and they don't give a drat. I wish I could go back to where I was [on the front], and they won't let me. If I knew it was this kind of war. My name is Sevalnev Victor Anatolievich, born September 27, 1979. Don't send people here, that's enough. They want to kill everyone,” was the last message Sevalnev sent through his wife.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2022 12:47
|
|
|
PederP posted:Macron never mentioned 'security guarantees' - he mentioned guarantees, and in a larger context. Everyone is getting their undies in a twist over a something he never said. A security guarantee is a very specific thing, and I don't think it was coincidence that a more generic and vague term was used. The entire conversation was focused on making sure Russia was not a position of feeling, or being able to claim being, threatened by NATO. Reuters did a hackjob of a paraphrase where they made it sound like he said something rather different. Just ignore that article - it's dumb and yet another example of words being taken out of context, twisted and the resulting headline being boosted to cause controversy. You're splitting hair and doing his weasel work for him. Excuse me for getting "my undies in a twist" over his latest Putin-comforting statement that stands in a row of calling NATO "braindead" and trying to out-Scholz Scholz at having the longest phone conversations with the guy. It's not unreasonable to put his latest suggestion in a long line of his clumsy attempts to somehow get Ukraine to accept some kind of dictated peace that's built on trusting Russia.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2022 13:22
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/ruslantrad/status/1599735531273060352?t=LWz8Cfyt4VZI10MO83NY3w&s=19 Kadyrov's assassins are still loose across Europe.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2022 13:34
|
|
|
I hear news of a lot of missiles going in the direction of Ukraine, air raid alarms across the whole country (excluding Crimea), early reports talk about around 120 long range missiles. https://twitter.com/pravda_eng/status/1599726691902816256 Ukraininans in other places online confirm this plus report blackouts. It's just getting dark and the temperatures are next to 0 in this part of Europe... gently caress this will be a bad night. Kikas fucked around with this message at 14:10 on Dec 5, 2022 |
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2022 14:08
|
|
|
GhostofJohnMuir posted:hmmm... ukrainian drone infiltrates over 400 miles of russian airspace, some kind of special operation, or some poor benighted airman hosed up will arming a decaying cold war era warhead Historically, and recently, Russia has claimed that even obvious attacks have been accidents rather than the other way around (see the sinking of the Muskva and the Crimean base bombings). For whatever reason they prefer to project extreme incompetence rather than admit a hit.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2022 14:09
|
|
|
Rappaport posted:To elaborate: Finland's official EU/foreign policy stance for a long time was attempting to strengthen (politically) the EU's common defense policies and practices, because for let's say historical reasons we were shy about NATO membership. This didn't really work out, because most of the EU was already in NATO and had very little interest in creating a parallel structure within the EU. And there's a whole host of historical and practical reasons why a EU-wide unified armed forces wouldn't really work out; for starters, what language would everybody use? English is... Awkward, from a purely EU perspective, and there's the French with their chauvinism, etc. And this is one of the more trivial political issues around the EU joint defense strengthening idea. Also because the initial reaction from both France and Germany was "lol we don't care" even though every EU country in the North and East Europe were screaming bloody murder about Russia just going for another shameless land grab at their neighboring country. How can you rely your safety to someone who wont even listen your argument? Optics-wise it was made even worse by Macron being phone buddies with Putin and talking about "how Russian requirements must be honored", and Scholz having "some undisclose discussions in Moscow" with Putin just days prior invasion and Germany being very late and seemingly reluctant to do anything to support Ukraine. The security guarantees from being an EU member alone died the moment two of the largest players told rest of us to piss off, and stop calling about the Ukraine war.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2022 14:15
|
|
|
Could you or Rappaport elaborate on the “historical reasons we were shy about NATO membership”?
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2022 14:18
|
|
|
Rinkles posted:Could you or Rappaport elaborate on the “historical reasons we were shy about NATO membership”? After WW2, Finland was an axis satellite that lost the war but didn't become a part of the Warsaw pact, or have a communist take-over. We did, however, sign an "Agreement of Friendship, Cooperation, and Mutual Assistance" with the Soviet Union, which essentially said that we'd fight to keep anyone from attacking the Soviets through our land or airspace (how this would've happened in practice, especially in the era of the ICBM, is left as an exercise to the reader), and that the Soviets would "assist" us in this when "mutually agreed upon". There were also clauses about having political consultations whenever the threat of Germany made the Soviets antsy (yes this was a real thing during the Cold War), and needless to say all of our foreign policy and some of our domestic policy dramas revolved around this pact with our super-power neighbour. Then the Soviet Union collapsed, history ended (until 2001), and according to free market enthusiasts and fukuyamaists etc. it was an inevitability that Russia would sooner or later integrate into the market-driven, democratic style Europe and Finland would be able to have more normalized relations with Russia. The aforementioned agreement of friendship etc. was disbanded as soon as the Soviet Union collapsed, and we had other, more normal diplomatic relations with the new Russia, and Finland's economic ties to Russia continued, if at a lesser magnitude than with the Soviet empire. Now, together with all this was the idea that we could've joined NATO around the same time as we joined the EU, but even joining the EU was domestically dicey for awhile, and it wasn't clear in the nineties that a majority of the people would have wanted to join NATO as well. And then in the 00's and onwards Russia seemed scary again, and no one really wanted to poke that particular bear with too much NATO enthusiasm. (Finland has the second-longest land border with Russia after Ukraine in Europe, so somewhat understandably geo-politically minded people considered Finland an "interest" of Russia.) This is why Finland was so enthusiastic about EU security policy deepening, since we are already in the EU and it'd be nice if some of the big boys would say out loud that they'd help us, with France's nukes if need be! But as the Kyhe points out, the big boys were not interested in this for their own reasons, and this never went anywhere. Then Russia/Putin decided to start his horrible war, and both political will and public sentiment in Finland rapidly shifted towards wanting to be under Uncle Sam's nuclear umbrella, and now we're here, waiting to see how much Erdögan wants to humiliate Sweden before letting them and us into NATO. Meanwhile, Russia's outwards propaganda has shifted from "Russia will destroy Finland if they join NATO" to "well it's unfortunate that the stupid Finns are joining the homonazis, such a shame really, mother Russia has always been kind to Finland", so I guess Vova has other priorities right now.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2022 14:56
|
|
|
Mr. Smile Face Hat posted:You're splitting hair and doing his weasel work for him. Did you read or hear the full interview? Reuters (and others misrepresenting what was said) is doing the weasel work here, not me. And yes, Macron has made plenty of bad calls and said plenty of dumb things. But I really don't see the controversy of this interview when it isn't butchered into a misleading headline by various media - it is very close to what many in Ukraine are saying. Having a non-hostile Russia is essential to future prospects for peace in Europe. Macrons is much closer to flat out saying that Russia needs to get over their irrational fears than he is to saying the West should give Russia concessions to placate them. I agree with the sentiment that an enduring peace can only come after a regime change in Russia. I also believe Macron, Scholz and many others, have wildly unrealistic ideas about what level of normalization is possible while the current regime is in charge. But that shouldn't make us blindly accept the misleading clickbait propagated by many media outlets - especially those that have ties with TASS and have in the past had a few instances of bias.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2022 14:58
|
|
|
Here's another security camera from an apartment block near Engels. At 0:15 you can hear the roar of a rocket or low flying jet engine. At 1:01 you hear the explosion. https://twitter.com/markito0171/status/1599655782617751552?s=20&t=gyRqhfxe3BKYWmLDabgt2Q
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2022 15:02
|
|
|
Kikas posted:I hear news of a lot of missiles going in the direction of Ukraine, air raid alarms across the whole country (excluding Crimea), early reports talk about around 120 long range missiles.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2022 15:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 13:54 |
|
|
PederP posted:Did you read or hear the full interview? Reuters (and others misrepresenting what was said) is doing the weasel work here, not me. And yes, Macron has made plenty of bad calls and said plenty of dumb things. But I really don't see the controversy of this interview when it isn't butchered into a misleading headline by various media - it is very close to what many in Ukraine are saying. Having a non-hostile Russia is essential to future prospects for peace in Europe. Macrons is much closer to flat out saying that Russia needs to get over their irrational fears than he is to saying the West should give Russia concessions to placate them. I think it's important, yeah, to recognize when a headline is made to wind you up, and to make sure that's what is actually being said. It's a big help for your mental health as well to be very careful about inflammatory headlines.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2022 15:02
|
|
