Punished Turtle posted:

Officer Sandvich posted:

Speaking of Time magazine



The only "Man of The Year" who died in his own piss.

And related to the article – I don't know what purpose of it. It's clear that that the war will continue for another year. So any whining/screaming doesn't make any sense.

There won't be any talk between Ukraine and Russia.
And, as for Russia, it's clear that Putin is waiting for US elections, so...


tldr: the war will continue (at least) for another year, so it doesn't matter what journalists write. And no, there will be no "peace deal". Not this year, not next year, not in the next 50 years. Just like between Russia and Japan. So any articles like that is useless.

Punished Turtle posted:

Punished Turtle posted:

Hubbert posted:

That's not true - look up Time's 2006 "Person of the Year".

supersnowman posted:

Ukraine joining the EU probably means another big part of its population leave for more prosperous EU countries, slashing any of its economic output and tax base launching the country into a fail cascade to be propped up by the EU or more IMF loan "financed" by more slashing of social spending.

quote:

As Vladimir Kornilov wrote in 2011 on the twentieth anniversary of Ukraine’s independence, the GDP of “free” Ukraine had never come close to Soviet Ukraine’s 1990 GDP. Electricity production in 2009 was 41.8% less than that produced under the yoke of empire. Meat production fell by 56%, milk by 52.6%, granulated sugar by 81.2%, and sugar beets by 77.3%. In 1990 Soviet Ukraine produced nine hundred thousand tons of sausages, while in 2010 “free” Ukraine produced two hundred and eighty-one thousand tons. Ukraine had been famous for her productivity in sugar-making under both the Russian Empire and the Soviet Union, and had complained that the Soviets had been taking away her sausages under communism.

In 1991, Ukraine was the leading producer of coal, iron, steel, and sugar in Europe. She inherited almost a quarter of Soviet industry. How did she use that inheritance? Her textile industry almost died, with a fall of 92.8% between 1990 and 2009. Production of cement fell by 58.2%, ammonia by 15.7%, steel by 67.6%, and finished rolled steel by 38.5%.

The once famous tractor industry died with a 98.6% fall in production. The machine tool industry died as well, with a 99.7% fall in production. Forging and pressing equipment production fell by 99.6%. Refrigerator production fell “only” 46.5%, while washing machine production fell 79.2%.

Once upon a time, TVs were manufactured in Lvov. Between 1990 and 2009 their production fell by 93.7%. Truck production fell 91%. The construction of residential buildings fell 63.3%. Mineral fertilizer production fell from 4.814 million tons to 2.285 million tons – a fall of 52.5%. In 1989 Soviet Ukraine produced 126 aircraft. The greatest aerospace manufacturing success of “free” Ukraine was in 2013, when the Antonov Design Bureau produced nine airliners. In other years, Antonov manufactured as few as one.

What now is produced more than it was during the “Russian occupation”? Sunflower oil production has increased 2.8 times, and grain production has increased by about a quarter. Becoming a Western sunflower and grain colony hasn’t created jobs for the masses, nor has it brought a standard of living equal to that of the Soviet period.

Ukraine experienced a terrible decade of economic decline in “independence”. Her GDP fell by 40.8%, and only started to grow in 2000. By 2008, Ukraine’s GDP was 74.2% that of Soviet Ukraine’s in 1990. However, the financial crisis caused it to regress five years. Ukraine was not a state – she was a disaster. The economic situation remained deplorable in 2013.

Chairman of the Committee of Economists of Ukraine Andrey Novak, spoke about the decline of the GDP of the Ukrainian economy in 2013. Economic indicators were half of what they were in 1990. Metrics declined by an average of 1.5 to 2 times across the entire economy, while some spheres fell to a tenth of pre-independence levels. Cast iron and aluminum production fell by 1.5 times. Economic decline affected even the agricultural sector, with only poultry remaining about as productive as it had in 1990. There were also no significant improvements in the pharmaceutical sector.

...

36% of Soviet Ukraine’s GDP was from industry in 1990. In 2010 it was 27.1% for independent Ukraine. Machine-building and metalworking accounted for 26.4% of production in 1991 and were 11.6% in 2011. Light industry was 12.3% of production in 1991, and 0.7% in 2011. Many high-tech industries disappeared or have been dying out in recent years – among them aerospace, shipbuilding, turbines, synthetic diamonds, and electronics. The share of industrial products involving high tech has fallen from 5% to 4.1%. Ukraine is losing income even on the transit of oil and gas. Oil is transported at only 25% of capacity and gas at 50%. Both continue to fall.

Even WWII was not as destructive as independence. The industrial output of Soviet Ukraine was 2.2 times higher in 1955 than before the war. In 2013, after 22 years of independence, industrial output had yet to even match that of pre-independence levels.

....

Why was the EU economic association agreement a death sentence for Ukraine? The draft agreement (which Yanukovich drew up before stalling) lowered some tariffs while zeroing others out entirely. It would have limited the export of Ukrainian goods, introduced a strict system of standards for the Ukrainian economy, restricted the activity of the energy market, and changed the railway gauge. In addition, there was a difference between the tariffs. Ukrainian pork was going to be subjected to a 10.2% + 93 euro tariff per 100 kg, while European pork imported to Ukraine was going to be subjected to only a 5% tariff. Butter exported to Europe was to have a tariff of 189.6 euros per 100 kg, while imported butter was to have a 10% tariff. Sardines exported to Europe were to have a 23% tariff, while those imported were to not have a tariff at all. The tariff to Europe was to be 94 euros per ton with a ceiling on exports of 950-1000 thousand tons and the tariff to Europe for corn was to be 94 euros per ton with a quota of 400-650 thousand tons. In addition, European producers received subsidies, while Ukrainian producers were forbidden to receive them. European metal products were to face no tariff, while Ukrainian metal exports to Europe were to face an arbitrary tariff.

The saga of European integration ended in a coup d’état and civil war. The size of the economy shrank by about thirty percent in a year in a half. As a result, Ukraine returned to the poverty of 1997.

Ardennes posted:

T-72s perhaps is even more stark; 14 T-72 B3M 2022s got destroyed, fair enough, and then 133 T-72 B3Ms 2016s, 218 T-72 B3s, 279 T-72B (including the 1989 variant destroyed). It makes sense that the later T-72s would do better but... really that much better?

BearsBearsBears posted:

In Wargame I would send my crappier tanks on the more dangerous missions. I would rather lose a crappier tank to an ambush than one of my fancier newer tanks. The better tanks would be held in reserve until I knew what I was up against. I wonder if something like this would also happen in a real war.

quote:

Once Oryx becomes accepted history I'm going to use it to finally prove that Soviet tanks are superior to Western ones. Since Oryx counts Ukrainian losses as Russian losses where he can that means that the best performance by Ukraine would be when both sides are using Soviet tanks or even just if Ukraine is using Soviet tanks. When Ukraine is using Western tanks or unique Ukrainian tanks their credited kills should go down precipitously.

fizzier posted:

“First I thought there was something wrong with our commanders, so I changed some of them. Then I thought maybe our soldiers are not fit for purpose, so I moved soldiers in some brigades,” says General Zaluzhny. When those changes failed to make a difference, the commander told his staff to dig out a book he once saw as a student in a military academy in Ukraine. Its title was “Breaching Fortified Defence Lines”. It was published in 1941 by a Soviet major-general, P. S. Smirnov, who analysed the battles of the first world war. “And before I got even halfway through it, I realised that is exactly where we are because just like then, the level of our technological development today has put both us and our enemies in a stupor.”

dk2m posted:

This has already happened, which is why Donbass seceded from Ukraine in 2014 in the first place

From Gubarev's book

quote:

Forests in the Ukrainian Carpathians are on the verge of extinction as the country faces an ecological disaster of unprecedented proportions, environmentalists say. Illegal loggers are illegally trafficking abroad entire trains of fir trees, earning millions of dollars. According to local residents, deforestation has dramatically intensified over the past two years.

The scale of the disaster can be seen in shocking photos of bird’s eye views of cleared mountain slopes which have been were published on the Internet. One of these photos is the southern slope of the Popadia Mountain at the junction of the Zakarpattia and Ivano-Frankivsk regions of the country, where logging is strictly prohibited by law.

Before the Maidan revolution of 2013, trees were growing quite densely. Now, less than three years later, a huge bare spots have formed. The green Carpathian Mountains are gradually turning into a desert. According to the deputy Yuri Gnepa of the Zakarpattia Regional Council, in the Mizhgirya district of Zakarpattia region, 40,000 cubic meters of wood were being cut down earlier. Now it is about 100,000.

In the opinion of some experts, the native mountains could become even more thinned out because authorities want to allow the free export abroad of cut timber. The government of President Petro Poroshenko has proposed that the Verkhovna Rada cancel the ten-year moratorium on the export of unprocessed timber (roundwood) that was approved in 2015. This has caused mixed reaction among experts.

“The timber export moratorium was aimed to protect forests from destruction and to support the domestic wood processing industry, which is breathing its last,” says Igor Sheludko, an expert on forestry.

“Instead of timber going to Ukrainian enterprises and feeding our workers and the economy, logs are being sold massively to our neighbors in western Europe. But this is unprofitable. One cubic meter of raw material costs 80-90 dollars, whereas treated lumber has a value ten times higher. We have to develop our own production. Ukraine is becoming a raw materials appendage.

“The EU countries did not like our moratorium on timber exports because they buy that timber from us for a song and then make furniture to sell back to us at high prices.”\

European governments even provide subsidies to companies to export timber from Ukraine. But the same governments cherish their own forests. In Poland, Slovakia and Romania, trees are not cut on an industrial scale. Moreover, Romanians equate illegal felling to threats to national security.

Forest workers, say locals, are self-financed and are paid very poor prices for their wood. They cut down fine-quality wood and sell it to intermediaries, who then ship the wood to the West and make tens of thousands of dollars per week.

“The trees which protected the river banks from erosion by swollen rivers are no longer there. Now only stumps remain. Nothing now slows the rapid river currents,” explains Wojtowicz.

“At the same time, rivers and wells in villages are drying up because the trees perform a water regulation function. Their roots hold back lots of moisture. For example, a large spruce tree can hold up to three tons of water. When it is cut, the moisture evaporates. The mountain dwellers are forced to walk for kilometers to find springs.

Xaris posted:

good quote

I also like pointing out just insane tidbits like this:

Punished Turtle posted:

Punished Turtle posted:

Punished Turtle posted:

Ardennes posted:

Anyway, Oryx is dead, but it still doesn't mean their numbers will be used as a historical source in every book about this war.

It is just the more you look at their numbers, the more weird things you find.

Half their numbers are damaged/abandon/captured tanks, but everyone knows this. There are hundreds of "unknown tanks" or "unidentifiable T-72s but that is old news.

But then you get into the real gist of their numbers in terms of actual destroyed tanks.

So according to them, the T-90 actually did quite well in this war, only 21 T-90As destroyed and 28 T-90Ms....considering the intensity of this war and its length. That isn't really that bad.

And only 63 T-80 BVMs and a handful (7) of T-80 BVMs 22s got destroyed; considering the modernization of T-80s that was going on before the war and during it, that isn't so bad either.

Then you get into the other T-80s, and 41 T-80 Us...and a whopping 282 BVs (which the Ukrainians also use) got destroyed. It is kind of interesting contrast, especially since Russia also had a bunch of Us in service and were rapidly modernizing their BVs to BVMs even before the war started.

T-72s perhaps is even more stark; 14 T-72 B3M 2022s got destroyed, fair enough, and then 133 T-72 B3Ms 2016s, 218 T-72 B3s, 279 T-72B (including the 1989 variant destroyed). It makes sense that the later T-72s would do better but... really that much better?

So it makes sense that older tanks, especially during the early days of the war, would do worse, according to them, putting all the T-90s and non-BV T-80s together only comes out to around to a little over half amount of 1980s-era T-72Bs that got lost. It is a bit strange. Also, almost no T-62Ms got lost either, which is also odd.

Hubbert posted:

That's not true - look up Time's 2006 "Person of the Year".

Punished Turtle posted:

Cerebral Bore posted:

as i recall all the smartest posters assured me that this dude is the greatest commander of our age, so i guess throwing your guys into the meatgrinder for a while before even looking up whether what you're trying to do has already been studied or not is the apex of generalship

Frosted Flake posted:

Remember, he had previously published his genius plan to win the war in 2023, and by all reports did all of the stuff he said would bring victory: fired missiles at Russian cities, targeted the Kerch bridge, received more Western aid etc.

Punished Turtle posted:

Punished Turtle posted:

Lostconfused posted:

Putin in 2007 "America's hegemony is unstable and is collapsing"

Western reporters in 2007 "Putin is threatening to destroy America"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hQ58Yv6kP44

Regarde Aduck posted:

yeah i posted about this quite early in the war, when the best threads were lolling it up about how bad Russian tanks are and it turned out 90% of the ostensible kills were unmodernised T-72's with T-90 and T-80U and above in very low numbers. But yeah, very early Ukraine claimed to have killed hundreds and hundreds of T-72B3's and I think it's because Oryx and co could just kinda glance at a tank and go "yeah that's a T-72, yeah ok its totally destroyed for reasons". And it was likely not destroyed and could have been a Ukrainian vehicle because their tank identification skills were lacking, possibly by design.

DancingShade posted:

Not forgetting the key part of the plan was "And then the Russians all just run away".

VoicesCanBe posted:

This was like the entire focal point of the strategy. Russia was supposed to run away in terror at the sight of Leopard 2s.

There's even articles that quote western officials who admit Ukraine lacked the manpower and resources to succeed in the offensive but allegedly they were gonna win anyway because i guess they wanted it bad enough or something.

dk2m posted:

amazing lol. cool to see the germans dream of deindustrializing Ukraine so it can be exploited for its raw resources just needed to wait few decades so it could happen under US/EU auspices

dk2m posted:

This has already happened, which is why Donbass seceded from Ukraine in 2014 in the first place

From Gubarev's book

gradenko_2000 posted:

https://twitter.com/DarthDefender/status/1720009077424902171?t=l7mR3_tc2af3QvD9oky9bg&s=19

I hate these nafo freaks who have no idea what they're talking about. The F-5 was competitive with the F-15 because it had an OODA advantage. It was so competitive that they used them as aggressor squadrons in Red Flag exercises(!!!)

gradenko_2000 posted:

https://twitter.com/DarthDefender/status/1720009077424902171?t=l7mR3_tc2af3QvD9oky9bg&s=19

I hate these nafo freaks who have no idea what they're talking about. The F-5 was competitive with the F-15 because it had an OODA advantage. It was so competitive that they used them as aggressor squadrons in Red Flag exercises(!!!)

gradenko_2000 posted:

https://twitter.com/DarthDefender/status/1720009077424902171?t=l7mR3_tc2af3QvD9oky9bg&s=19

I hate these nafo freaks who have no idea what they're talking about. The F-5 was competitive with the F-15 because it had an OODA advantage. It was so competitive that they used them as aggressor squadrons in Red Flag exercises(!!!)