(Thread IKs:
fatherboxx)
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qmd-QG7Ve0E
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2023 18:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 09:34 |
|
Killer robot posted:Important for the actual organized groups, but where money is involved it's still important that plenty of the membership believes, for free, that the conflict is all caused by Western meddling and without that support propping up resistance they'd surely be happy with the new borders. It's bullshit of course, and a lot like the people who think black people are treated just fine and would be comfortable and happy without big media liberals stirring the pot with the whole BLM thing, some of it is self-delusion since even they know better. But it's still the kind of self-delusion people gladly do for free because the alternative is the very uncomfortable process of reevaluating deeply-held priors. Sure, but a key mechanism of propaganda that I think goes underappreciated (and which Russia definitely understands) is that if you get a sustained flow of funding and incentives into a population for a sufficient period, they can socialize around the belief system, and then incentives develop around the messages independent of source. Put simply, it starts paying to separately spread and intensify the message even without top-down funding. That creates the free-standing populations and subgroups who re-mediate, re-propagate, and often enhance and vary your messaging. This is, in some respects, what happened with the alt-right and is part of the function of the Republicans repeatedly radicalizing their base into increasingly unhinged purgative movements.
|
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2023 18:48
|
|
|
CBS News reports that a US official has stated that North Korea is supplying artillery to Russia: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/ukraine-war-russia-north-korea-artillery-us-gives-kyiv-siezed-iran-ammunition/ Not quite news, but has the Ukrainian MOD statements been more muted since Resnikov got removed for Umierov back in September? I thought some of the old spokespeople also got removed during the transition, but I wasn't sure if I'm noticing them saying less because the offense has stalled out or because of a change in leadership.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2023 20:19
|
|
|
New post from Tatarigami_ua (Twitter guy who claims to be a Ukrainian reserve officer) https://twitter.com/Tatarigami_UA/status/1710382234803290154?t=ysIc62OVhKyka_YqfJGrdw&s=19 Probably not news to anyone reading this thread, he says Russia still has a lot of reserves they can deploy defensively and a big breakthrough in the near future is unlikely
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2023 21:14
|
|
|
My under standing is that russia is pulling people from other parts of the line, which seems way worse than mobilizing dudes not already doing something in ukraine. That not the case?
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2023 21:38
|
|
|
My big question is how efficiently can they utilize these reserves. Assuming Ukraine hits more and more competent leaders and officers over time, I can't imagine Russia being able to corral these reserves without it essentially becoming a giant meatgrinder for themselves.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2023 22:17
|
|
|
Logic Probed posted:I can't imagine Russia being able to corral these reserves without it essentially becoming a giant meatgrinder for themselves. Isn't this basically what it's been for Russia for well over a year now? It's just that they have sooooo many more bodies to throw at this war.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2023 00:22
|
|
|
I'm reading up on the Minsk-2 agreement from 2015... and am I reading this right? Russia and Ukraine were two of the signing parties, then the rebel Republic's leaders were added later, and Russia then claimed not to be a "party" to the agreement because they were still pretending that they were not participants in the war? In what world could it ever have been legitimate?
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2023 05:46
|
|
|
small butter posted:I'm reading up on the Minsk-2 agreement from 2015... and am I reading this right? Russia and Ukraine were two of the signing parties, then the rebel Republic's leaders were added later, and Russia then claimed not to be a "party" to the agreement because they were still pretending that they were not participants in the war? In what world could it ever have been legitimate? The "gently caress you, try and stop us lol" world
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2023 06:37
|
|
|
Charliegrs posted:Isn't this basically what it's been for Russia for well over a year now? It's just that they have sooooo many more bodies to throw at this war. Having and using are different things. I don't know when or where the line is, but there is a breaking point where internal political pressure makes further mobilization not feasible for Russia.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2023 06:51
|
|
|
small butter posted:I'm reading up on the Minsk-2 agreement from 2015... and am I reading this right? Russia and Ukraine were two of the signing parties, then the rebel Republic's leaders were added later, and Russia then claimed not to be a "party" to the agreement because they were still pretending that they were not participants in the war? In what world could it ever have been legitimate? Yep, welcome to the "how the gently caress can anyone honestly recommend Ukraine to even consider negotiating with Russia?" situation.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2023 10:13
|
|
|
small butter posted:I'm reading up on the Minsk-2 agreement from 2015... and am I reading this right? Russia and Ukraine were two of the signing parties, then the rebel Republic's leaders were added later, and Russia then claimed not to be a "party" to the agreement because they were still pretending that they were not participants in the war? In what world could it ever have been legitimate? I'm sure Russia will abide by a hypothetical Minsk-3 agreement; let's push our bloodthirsty Western politicians to give Russia some breathing room to stockpile weapons and tanks
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2023 10:52
|
|
|
small butter posted:I'm reading up on the Minsk-2 agreement from 2015... and am I reading this right? Russia and Ukraine were two of the signing parties, then the rebel Republic's leaders were added later, and Russia then claimed not to be a "party" to the agreement because they were still pretending that they were not participants in the war? In what world could it ever have been legitimate? Yeah it's funny as poo poo, people genuinely expected Ukraine to go along with the agreement while Russia has troops in Ukranian territory. You must run legislative elections in territories that have russian troops at the polling stations and then give these legislators veto power over your foreign policy.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2023 11:24
|
|
|
Pook Good Mook posted:Having and using are different things. I don't know when or where the line is, but there is a breaking point where internal political pressure makes further mobilization not feasible for Russia. They seem to be a long way from that. From 11914 to 1918, Russia endured 2.3 Million causalities. Relatively, this is just a blip.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2023 11:54
|
|
|
daslog posted:They seem to be a long way from that. From 11914 to 1918, Russia endured 2.3 Million causalities. Relatively, this is just a blip. What were the demographic trends at the time? Hasn't Russia been trending down in growth, especially in the military fighting age category, since the 90's? Not saying that the conflict is some sort of death-knell to Russia but it definitely has mid- to -long term implications for growing an economy or pursuing a war.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2023 12:05
|
|
|
daslog posted:They seem to be a long way from that. From 11914 to 1918, Russia endured 2.3 Million causalities. Relatively, this is just a blip. That also led to removal of the Tsar and a massive civil war. Also loss of periphery regions like Finland, Baltics and Poland.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2023 12:07
|
|
|
daslog posted:They seem to be a long way from that. From 11914 to 1918, Russia endured 2.3 Million causalities. Relatively, this is just a blip. 2.3m in a very different war. If you think your country will be exterminated if you lose, then you're willing to accept a lot more casualties (these casualties were not accepted, though).
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2023 13:27
|
|
|
Dirt5o8 posted:What were the demographic trends at the time? Hasn't Russia been trending down in growth, especially in the military fighting age category, since the 90's? The Russian empire had a lot more young men. Of course, modern Russia is using a lot of soldiers a lot older than who would have been sent to the front back then. Kchama posted:2.3m in a very different war. If you think your country will be exterminated if you lose, then you're willing to accept a lot more casualties (these casualties were not accepted, though). In WW1, very few people thought that their country would be exterminated if they lost, that's a WW2 thing.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2023 13:33
|
|
|
Panzeh posted:Yeah it's funny as poo poo, people genuinely expected Ukraine to go along with the agreement while Russia has troops in Ukranian territory. You must run legislative elections in territories that have russian troops at the polling stations and then give these legislators veto power over your foreign policy. Well, the Ukrainian interpretation was that Russian troops would leave first and these extra legislators would just have extra local self government rights (which Ukraine badly needed anyway). And a vague mess like that was perfect for Obama/Merkel/Hollande to kick the can down the road and pretend nothing much is happening.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2023 13:42
|
|
|
Tuna-Fish posted:The Russian empire had a lot more young men. Of course, modern Russia is using a lot of soldiers a lot older than who would have been sent to the front back then. I guess I should clarify that I was saying, only that amount would be accepted if you were in such a war. That's why I said those casualties were not accepted.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2023 13:42
|
|
|
OddObserver posted:Well, the Ukrainian interpretation was that Russian troops would leave first and these extra legislators would just have extra local self government rights (which Ukraine badly needed anyway). And a vague mess like that was perfect for Obama/Merkel/Hollande to kick the can down the road and pretend nothing much is happening. Yeah i mean Ukraine went along with it but russia never implemented their side of it and claimed they're not a party to it so their troops can do what they want. I don't think you can take that tack and complain that the other guy broke the agreement. It's definitely in line with western thinking on the matter, though, that they could get this deal done and get russia out of their hair.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2023 13:54
|
|
|
Panzeh posted:Yeah it's funny as poo poo, people genuinely expected Ukraine to go along with the agreement while Russia has troops in Ukranian territory. You must run legislative elections in territories that have russian troops at the polling stations and then give these legislators veto power over your foreign policy. Could you explain? By "regions," I assume you mean the rebel-held areas. Why would they have veto power? Is that in the agreement? Or is veto power something that all "governors" or leaders of various Ukrainian regions have via the Constitution?
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2023 14:33
|
|
|
"rebels"
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2023 14:53
|
|
|
Cocaine Bear posted:"rebels" Who by the way are mostly all dead at this point because Russia used them as cannon fodder in the time before they came around to mobilization.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2023 15:51
|
|
|
small butter posted:Could you explain? By "regions," I assume you mean the rebel-held areas. Why would they have veto power? Is that in the agreement? Or is veto power something that all "governors" or leaders of various Ukrainian regions have via the Constitution? I believe that to be part of the "Special Status" that the region would have under the Minsk agreements. Decentralization in general is different.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2023 16:04
|
|
|
Don't you know that heroic Russian freedom fighters in Ukraine continue to hold out against Nazi Ukrainian forces despite the assistance of the imperialist West?
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2023 16:46
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/The_Lookout_N/status/1710616079020482891 Sevastopol remains a target rich environment.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2023 18:03
|
|
|
Moon Slayer posted:https://twitter.com/The_Lookout_N/status/1710616079020482891 Have air defenses improved somehow? What is the Russian rational for leaving so many ships exposed in a place that has already been shown vulnerable?
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2023 18:29
|
|
|
Moon Slayer posted:https://twitter.com/The_Lookout_N/status/1710616079020482891 I wonder why Russia moved the other 10 ships, then? To lure enemy drone attacks away from the important targets? Or maybe they're moving the ships in groups, and the remaining ships are slated to leave in the near future? I'd like to say this is the most likely thing that will happen, but with Russia's military decisions so far in this conflict, I also have to account for the possibility that they'll just leave them there in easy reach of Ukrainian missile and drone strikes. Until they're all sunk or disabled, of course. As an aside, I love how it's apparently a "narrative" to look at satellite pictures and draw conclusions from them. Some more news, from the Zeit Liveblog: -A party secretary of United Russia got a surprise visit by Ukrainian partisans in the occupied parts of Kherson. He died later in hospital. (The article leaves it unclear if the attack was a car bomb, or just a straight up run-and-gun.) -Denys Schmyhal, Ukrainian prime minister*, told parliament that drone production has grown a hundredfold in the last year. Over 200 new companies have begun developing drones for Ukraine, and production is still accelerating. -On the frontlines: Our media still reports small progress in Bakhmut and in the South, but no major breakthrough so far. Russia keeps losing ground, though. *at least that's what online translation gives me for "Ministerpräsident", so I hope it's at least close
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2023 18:39
|
|
|
I dont know posted:Have air defenses improved somehow? What is the Russian rational for leaving so many ships exposed in a place that has already been shown vulnerable? Other places they could put them lack the infrastructure and are gonna be far *more* vulnerable to naval drones without a lot of effort.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2023 18:43
|
|
|
Presumably Russia has plugged the vulnerabilities that were used previously, plus there may be other tactical considerations where some piers are better protected than others. But like Shoe said, there's not much capacity elsewhere for the entire fleet. Sevastopol is so important for that reason, it's been the Black Sea Fleet's base for over a century now and Crimea's geography allows for things that the lowlands elsewhere in the Black Sea coast don't really provide, such as submarine pens and storages inside a mountain. Novorossiisk is not safe from Ukraine either so the safe base would have to be a lot further east, where lies another enemy Georgia. Building complete replacement facilities is difficult, costly and against Russia's official policy which is that Ukrainazis must die. If in the end Sevastopol will be Russian, what point is there in evacuating everything (and building expensive new infra for them)? Frankly I hope they will find the answer soon.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2023 20:57
|
|
|
There are potential solutions. I do not know if, in response to your naval base in a separatist territory of a neighbor being threatened, you should build another naval base in the separatist territory of another neighbor.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2023 21:17
|
|
|
They should follow the Chinese strategy and build a Blacklantis in the middle of the Black Sea!
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2023 23:20
|
|
|
They did just announce plans to build in Abkhazia. (Might have been mentioned before?) https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/russia-plans-naval-base-black-sea-coast-breakaway-georgian-region-izvestiya-2023-10-05/ quote:Russia has signed a deal for a permanent naval base on the Black Sea coast of the breakaway Georgian region of Abkhazia, the Izvestiya newspaper reported, prompting criticism from Georgia which said the move was a "gross violation" of its sovereignty.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2023 23:31
|
|
|
quote:prompting criticism from Georgia which said the move was a "gross violation" of its sovereignty Quel surprise!
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2023 01:27
|
|
|
Nenonen posted:build a Blacklantis in the middle of the Black Sea! ... go on?
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2023 05:55
|
|
|
Volmarias posted:... go on? China is creating artificial islands in the South China Sea and putting quite substantial bases on them with runways, ports, repair infrastructure, etc. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/mar/21/china-has-fully-militarized-three-islands-in-south-china-sea-us-admiral-says
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2023 09:04
|
|
|
Electric Wrigglies posted:China is creating artificial islands in the South China Sea and putting quite substantial bases on them with runways, ports, repair infrastructure, etc. It's one weird trick to make your territorial waters legally extend out to where you claimed they were
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2023 11:25
|
|
|
The cost of doing that must be insane. Fill materials are cheap but the amount, plus transport cost, infrastructure and saltwater maintenance, erosion control, personnel sustainment costs... Edit: \/\/That's one cost mitigation anyway. Thanks! Dirt5o8 fucked around with this message at 16:43 on Oct 8, 2023 |
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2023 12:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 09:34 |
|
|
Dirt5o8 posted:The cost of doing that must be insane. Fill materials are cheap but the amount, plus transport cost, infrastructure and saltwater maintenance, erosion control, personnel sustainment costs...
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2023 15:35
|
|
