|
Shes Not Impressed posted:https://twitter.com/olgatokariuk/status/1496878993534255104?s=20&t=dYwra1uHfL68PWiUGEDubQ With this out on Twitter as a propaganda coup I can't help but wonder how this is gonna go for these guys and their families when/if they get back to Russia.
|
#
¿
Feb 24, 2022 17:25
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 10, 2024 02:12 |
|
|
barbecue at the folks posted:A military dude I know noted that if social media is anything to go by, the Ukrainian main mechanized forces are also still nowhere to be seen. What has been going on is smaller local units fighting. It seems that UKR is being disciplined and biding its time and waiting for the decisive battles while keeping a communications blackout, which is probably a good strategy, seeing how Russia is not doing as hot as they obviously thought they would. There's a lot that remains unclear. There's some guy over in C-SPAM furiously arguing that the fact that Ukrainian mechanized forces haven't made a peep (especially around Kyiv) is proof that Russian preparatory bombardments and airstrikes have completely obliterated organized Ukrainian resistance and forced them to resort to no more than civilians with molotovs and AKs (as per Twitter) and that this is an incredible, unprecedented feat of Russian arms. Seems to cite how the airport defense was made by named, organized larger units but after that nothing, only smaller and more scattered formations named. Genuinely not sure but what's more likely? That's the Ukrainian military near Kyiv has actually been wholly crippled early strikes, or that they're simply observing radio silence and waiting for the right moment? Gut says the latter but I do have to wonder what the "right moment" is exactly if not an attack on Kyiv. Edit: Checking out C-SPAM is like stepping into another dimension, jesus. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST) Tomn fucked around with this message at 11:56 on Feb 26, 2022 |
|
#
¿
Feb 26, 2022 11:54
|
|
|
acidx posted:See, it's like the Russians aren't even prepared for any kind of resistance. They are either really sloppy, or they are just complacent because they haven't faced any sustained resistance, which might lend credibility to the argument that Ukraine is letting them go by and then trying to hit the supply lines. Random Ukrainian civilians going up to Russian soldiers and scolding them while they stand around awkwardly like naughty schoolchildren seems to be a running theme. Has this happened much in recent wars? I guess the similarity in language and culture makes it easier to do that than for, say, a random Iraqi to berate a US Marine with much effect.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 26, 2022 12:37
|
|
|
raverrn posted:https://twitter.com/RihoTerras/status/1497537193346220038?t=Wa-4YVEhX9Krs3e5TldzEg&s=19 Eh, how on earth would a Ukrainian officer have inside baseball on Putin's secret deliberations?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 26, 2022 14:05
|
|
|
Al-Saqr posted:https://twitter.com/RWApodcast/status/1497467132950548486?s=20&t=HM8QjIXk7JyFfygCnsKz6g So what is this video showing, exactly? I can see a bunch of uniformed men lining up in an orderly to grab bags of something or other and then walking away with minimal supervision or guards. How exactly do we know that these are Ukrainian prisoners and not, say, Russian troops getting Russian supplies? Honest question, because I'm not familiar with the identifying marks in question.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 26, 2022 15:25
|
|
|
cinci zoo sniper posted:https://adamtooze.substack.com/p/chartbook-87-are-we-on-the-brink For the record, Adam Tooze is the author of Wages of Destruction, to the best of my knowledge the definitive work in academia about the Nazi wartime economy (and what a complete omnishambles it was). So he's not unfamiliar with the subject, though he may or may not have access to accurate data points to base conclusions on.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 26, 2022 23:33
|
|
|
Crosby B. Alfred posted:Dumb question, My understanding is that cutting off the border requires occupying it. Which is a bit difficult when the border is full of angry Ukrainians with shiny new Western toys.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 26, 2022 23:47
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:https://twitter.com/abughazalehkat/status/1497768813860896770?s=20&t=j3fwcdl43AS_1DmjyG68Mg https://youtu.be/HbmZrzN3WFE You know what, I think I’ll take this guy over shirtless Putin fishing or whatever macho bullshit he likes to project.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 27, 2022 04:31
|
|
|
ZombieLenin posted:What the gently caress is that supposed to mean? Could homeboy be more cryptic? Think it’s basically “just so you know, we can PROVE you were ordered to commit war crimes, and big daddy Putin won’t be around to protect you forever. So you sure you want to push the atrocity button and end up in The Hague one fine day?” Or to put it another way, “don’t you fuckers dare burn down Kyiv, we’re watching.”
|
|
#
¿
Feb 27, 2022 05:08
|
|
|
Majorian posted:They aren't saying "all you need to do is end NATO and talk to Russia." Nowhere in that piece does it state that that is all we need to do to solve this war. You're right, they don't say that's all that's necessary. They also state that it's necessary to end all sanctions, stand down all military forces, keep everyone far away from the border so that poor ol' Putin isn't spooked and then politely ask Putin to please stop invading after having removed all possible justification for war, nevermind the fact that Putin never had any real justification for war in the first place. None of this is operating anywhere close to reality, on any level. Putin isn't going to stop because people asked politely, and even if somehow he would, there is no electorate in any Western country (or most non-Western countries for that matter!) who would agree to just walk away and let the invader do whatever they want in the faint hope that maybe he won't just smash Ukraine into the ground.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 27, 2022 06:43
|
|
|
virtualboyCOLOR posted:As I said, the UK could end this poo poo now but straight up seizing all property and assets owned by the oligarchs. They haven’t. The UK is directly responsible for the atrocities on the Ukrainian working class. Are not the current sanctions, especially the SWIFT bans and the freeze on Russian central bank assets going to crater the wealth, power, and property of Russian oligarchs far, far more than nationalizing whatever luxury assets they have internationally? I mean sure, by all means, nationalize them, I'm not gonna shed any tears for a lost superyacht here or there (I loving hate superyachts as a concept myself) and it might help a bit but it seems strange to claim that this act, alone, is the only thing that can and will motivate them to resist Putin when they've already got so many other daggers pointed at them.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 27, 2022 06:57
|
|
|
On looking it up, it appears the statement announcing the new sanctions includes this section:quote:Fourth, we commit to launching this coming week a transatlantic task force that will ensure the effective implementation of our financial sanctions by identifying and freezing the assets of sanctioned individuals and companies that exist within our jurisdictions. As a part of this effort we are committed to employing sanctions and other financial and enforcement measures on additional Russian officials and elites close to the Russian government, as well as their families, and their enablers to identify and freeze the assets they hold in our jurisdictions. We will also engage other governments and work to detect and disrupt the movement of ill-gotten gains, and to deny these individuals the ability to hide their assets in jurisdictions across the world. Doesn't this seem like a preliminary step in seizing assets, at the very least? Granted it's not an immediate declaration of nationalization but it does seem like it's holding that dagger over their heads, with the option to plunge it down if necessary.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 27, 2022 07:14
|
|
|
Also, I admit I'm not too up on the specifics myself but wasn't there thread discussion earlier about how the SWIFT ban is big, but the central bank asset freeze is bigger? Like, "potentially shatter the Russian economy" big. Which is...admittedly a pretty poo poo deal for the average Russian on the street but I would have thought that would have oligarchs howling as is.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 27, 2022 07:25
|
|
|
virtualboyCOLOR posted:Can we get a source. Last thing I saw was SWIFT was not pulled and instead there were very specific carve outs to ensure it wouldn’t be effective. Sure. From 8 hours ago apparently - if you haven't caught up this might explain our earlier conflicts: https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/statement_22_1423
|
|
#
¿
Feb 27, 2022 08:09
|
|
|
Also in response to your earlier point about asset seizure, they announce a task force to identify and freeze the assets of targeted elites.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 27, 2022 08:11
|
|
|
virtualboyCOLOR posted:“Targeted”. That better mean any Russian nationals with assets over 1 million euros. Said assets should be seized with ownership permanently belonging to the local governments citizens. That poo poo doesn’t get “handed back” even when this is over. Well, if you want the exact wording, again... quote:Fourth, we commit to launching this coming week a transatlantic task force that will ensure the effective implementation of our financial sanctions by identifying and freezing the assets of sanctioned individuals and companies that exist within our jurisdictions. As a part of this effort we are committed to employing sanctions and other financial and enforcement measures on additional Russian officials and elites close to the Russian government, as well as their families, and their enablers to identify and freeze the assets they hold in our jurisdictions. We will also engage other governments and work to detect and disrupt the movement of ill-gotten gains, and to deny these individuals the ability to hide their assets in jurisdictions across the world. Also others can explain in better detail, but apparently point 2, the restrictions on the central bank, has the potential to nuke the Russian economy. As in, triggering hyperinflation. That seems pretty harsh to me? But I'm going by how others have explained the fallout of freezing Russian central bank assets, I'm no economist myself.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 27, 2022 08:19
|
|
|
Xotl posted:There's been a lot of "freezing central bank assets is the super omega financial powerplay" type-posting. Anyone with more of a financial background: can anyone explain why Putin/Russia, which seems to have taken such careful steps towards autarky or long-term supply hoarding as part of his run up to this obviously planned war, seems to have missed preparing for this step? Is there something inherent in the structure of finance that meant there was no way it could have really been mitigated against? I'd actually appreciate a full explanation myself since I'm having a hard time wrapping my head around finance, but here's some posts from when this was brought up earlier: steinrokkan posted:My brain no understand economic good, but wouldn't Russia's central bank assets be deposited domestically? Morrow posted:Sticking to my lane here, a huge chunk of their savings are probably in foreign currencies because of the expectation of a drop in the rouble. If you're expecting to lose 10-20% of the value from a invasion, you're going to move a lot of wealth to a more stable asset. coelomate posted:Their central bank has reserves of foreign currency. Ostensibly such sanctions can dramatically limit the ability for that foreign currency to be used. Servetus posted:I think they mean restrict the Russian central bank from doing business outside of Russia. So the central bank won't be able to buy back Russian currency overseas in exchange for foreign currency holdings, meaning Rubles can't be exchanged for other other currencies, potentially collapsing the Ruble as it loses the capacity to purchase anything outside of Russia. a pipe smoking dog posted:As Russia needs to sell a lot of fossil fuels in dollars and euros and then buy goods in those same currencies a major part of their reserves will be banked with the Federal Reserve and the ECB so they don't have to covert them to roubles. This is why some currencies are called "reserve currencies" because countries maintain a large portion of their reserves in these currencies instead of their own. ZombieLenin posted:Putin can get around, in a kind of laborious and painful way, a lot of the banking sanctions so far precisely because the Russian Central Bank stockpiled foreign currency after the initial sanctions placed on Russia after the annexation of Crimea—for just that purpose. a pipe smoking dog posted:the freezing of the russian central banks assets is enormous. The russian government has been desperately trying to prop up the rouble for the last few days, with their foreign reserves frozen you are very much in a hyperinflation situation as they try to keep the economy liquid. Expect runs on banks and sovereign debt defaults. e:beaten and with a more in-depth source
|
|
#
¿
Feb 27, 2022 08:44
|
|
|
Leal posted:As funny as it is watching the supposed number 2 strongest military be befuddled by removal of street signs and drive in circles, do they really not have a basic GPS? Oooh, this one's in my wheelhouse! I use GPS in my profession though I'm not an expert on it, and while I can't explain what exactly is happening but I can offer some possibilities. So one of the things to understand about GPS is that GPS isn't actually international - it's the name of the American global navsat system, but the Europeans and Russians, among others, operate their own systems as well (Galileo and GLONASS, respectively). All three of these systems have global reach and commercial GNSS systems can take into one or more of these networks, and tapping into more is generally better because of the way GNSS systems work. See, the way they function is by receiving signals from multiple satellites to triangulate your position. One reading isn't enough, and the more readings you have, the more accurate the read will be (you want a minimum of three or four satellites in range). Furthermore, the actual angle of the reading matters as well - ideally you want satellite reads that are fairly far apart from each other because if you're getting readings from a bunch of satellites that are too close together you end up leaving a lot of room for error. Because of that, you can see how tapping into multiple GNSS systems improves accuracy, as you have more possible satellites to draw on for readings. The problem is that I assume that GPS and Galileo are probably not talking to Russian military GNSS receivers at this time, forcing them to rely only on the GLONASS system itself. This isn't the end of the world - GLONASS isn't all that inaccurate by itself, though it's slightly less accurate than GPS - but it does mean they have fewer satellites they can get readings off. Combine this with urban terrain shadowing satellite signals, and you might end up with somewhat more inaccurate readings that could throw you off with the relatively tight quarters of urban navigation. There's also a thing about the different systems using different geodetic datums as well (i.e. where the GNSS system reckons the center of the Earth to be as it spits out lat/long), but the differences between different countries by this point should be fairly minor. Still, GPS is only as accurate as the map you have - so how accurate are the Russian maps of Ukraine right now, after eight years in which I presume the Ukrainians weren't keen on sharing cartographic info with the Russians? Hypothetically one might use Google Maps or something, but I do have to wonder - can that be blocked on Russian phones in the Ukraine? Alternatively, nobody wants to be the guy with his head down staring at a map in an urban combat zone and they were hoping they could figure things out just by looking. Couldn't say for sure, but the above is a possibility!
|
|
#
¿
Feb 27, 2022 09:55
|
|
|
KillHour posted:I'm not 100% sure of this, but I'm 99.99% sure GPS doesn't have a bidirectional communication with your equipment and decide whether to talk to you or not. It just yells out the time and your device figures it out. Military GPS is encrypted, but it's not like they could blacklist you if you somehow figured out the encryption keys. Maybe they could change the key regularly? I don't actually know. But while the US could theoretically shut down commercial GPS satellites or gently caress with their accuracy when over a given landmass, they can't prevent a specific group from using them. Ah, possible. I only worked with commercial applications and we weren't super concerned about about an actual GPS shutdown (because if it happened we'd have bigger problems), just that it was possible and that's why multiple systems exist.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 27, 2022 10:17
|
|
|
Kavros posted:If you were writing this as a war drama, now is the interlude where the dictator is enraged and made vulnerable by his hubrustic overextention, so he selects which loyalist general is to be scapegoated and made to fall on his own sword to reinforce that dear leader cannot fail, he can only be failed, as the remaining right hand men start to grow increasingly worried about their own skins. There actually was a Russian chief of staff who got fired a little bit ago, wasn’t there? Valery something? nurmie posted:Same goes for the idiotic claims in the vein of "Kyiv is Helm's Deep and Russia is Mordor and Putin is Slytherin and NATO is Gondor" and so on. I feel it's somewhat unbecoming. Who is saying this here? I don’t doubt that it happening somewhere on the Twittersphere because the Internet gonna Internet, but I don’t recall seeing it here. Aside from that one Ukrainian “You have my Javelin” meme but that was mocking how Western support consisted of giving the Ukrainians arms and waving as they went off to fight.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 27, 2022 10:49
|
|
|
Wasn’t it also mentioned that there’s evidence of at least some of the conscripts having been signed on in December, IE not really a lot of time in terms of training? And that as a result a lot of them are just staying in their APCs to feel safe instead of dismounting to provide proper screening?nurmie posted:I might've gotten triggered by one of those twitter posts Oh yeah that was weird. It did get pushback pretty quickly, though.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 27, 2022 11:02
|
|
|
Earliest assessments were that Ukraine could potentially put up a stiff fight but would eventually be overwhelmed by far superior Russian numbers and a kind of lovely defensive strategic position barring sanctions crippling Putin or convincing him to pull back. Do we still think that’s true? Signs of high morale and Russian failures have been heartening, but are we prepared yet to call it a big enough shitshow on Putin’s part that he might actually stalemate or even lose? There’s still a lot of troops that have yet to go into action, no?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 27, 2022 11:20
|
|
|
I really, really hope that if Putin is crazy enough to actually push the button someone in the room is just gonna go “Oh, gently caress this” and shoot him.canepazzo posted:https://twitter.com/KyivIndependent/status/1497929591209529347 Huh! Wasn’t quite expecting that but if Putin’s feeling shaky and Zelensky thinks he can stop further damage to Ukraine, could be worth it on both sides. Let’s see how it goes.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 27, 2022 14:57
|
|
|
Inner Light posted:What do you mean gave a way to save face, how? Basically: CIA: Hey, everybody, Putin is about to go to war, that bad man that he is! Putin: What? Of course not, you silly geese, these are just perfectly normal military exercises! *walks away whistling* The Rest of the World: Oh for gently caress's sake, CIA, when are you going to stop crying wolf? If Putin had decided that having his hand revealed was a good reason to call off the attack, he could have scored an easy diplomatic win on the cheap while looking like an aggrieved victim. He wouldn't have gotten Ukraine, but it would have been a pretty decent trade. Instead he decided that the correct thing to do was to actually give the CIA credibility, of all things.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 27, 2022 16:13
|
|
|
Dante posted:He is however not crazy/mentally ill/demented/etc or invading a country just because he has brain worms or something. Putin and Xi Jinping are if anything the two most strategically savy autocrats in the world, and Putin would objectively rank pretty high about the historical soviet dictators as well. Is this really the case, though? Like, even if Zelensky surrendered unconditionally right here and now for whatever reason, is Russia's position better off than it was before the war? Has he actually gained more than he lost? Is NATO more or less of a potential danger to Russia? Is Russia going to have a larger or smaller border with NATO states?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 27, 2022 16:49
|
|
|
Dante posted:The options to increase the military pressure would probably result in a humanitarian catastrophe/severe war crimes and that would both be a domestic problem and cause pressure within NATO to act. It's not a great situation for Putin for sure. My main point is that he's not literally a crazy person blowing bubbles and invading countries for fun. You're not wrong that Putin mostly has bad choices available now, but the thing is none of these choices needed to be presented to him in the first place if he'd made the initial choice "Not to invade the Ukraine (after saying he wouldn't)." Dante posted:Well the NATO border would be identical and Ukraine would be a client state, so yeah that would be a gain for Putin. I was thinking of Finland and Sweden looking to join up, as well as the Ukraine's own borders with with NATO states. I suppose you could consider Ukraine to act as a buffer, but is that worth all of NATO furiously rearming, including Germany, and acting with far greater hostility towards Russia? Edit: Dante posted:The Russian perspective on the west/NATO isn't tied to the level of defense spending. It's about how much does it hinder Russian power in the old USSR. Former soviet republics becoming democracies and choosing to realign away from Russia is something they're desperate to stop. But the thing is, this argument hinges on "Gaining power in the old SSRs" being a worthwhile goal in and of itself - if we accept that as something worth pursuing at all costs then yes, maybe one could argue Putin is acting rationally towards that goal. But IS it really worth the cost? Is becoming an international pariah state, tanking your economy, and committing your army to a long occupation for the sake of gaining influence over old countries your predecessor state used to control a rational decision in and of itself? Tomn fucked around with this message at 16:58 on Feb 27, 2022 |
|
#
¿
Feb 27, 2022 16:55
|
|
|
PIZZA.BAT posted:This is from a while back but it’s important to know that the vast majority of GPS satellites are controlled by the US military. Not a good idea for russian soldiers to use them Eh, this was touched on earlier as well but the Russians have their own global satnav system, GLONASS. They don't need the US GPS, though they can be more accurate if they had both. Either way the military is centered around using GLONASS precisely because they want to be independent of GPS.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 27, 2022 17:07
|
|
|
Dante posted:I'm not entirely sure what you mean by that. Ukraine's realignment with the west is a huge threat to Putin and he's been aggressively trying to stop the former USSR republics that are still in Russia's sphere of influence from realigning. It was a success in Georgia and he still occupies 20% of that country. This current situation looks like a miscalcuation, though I think there's no way Putin would accept Ukraine becoming a NATO member (because he's a dictator, not being that's a current opinion). I think we might be talking past each other somehow. Let's start over. You stated that whatever else he is, Putin is currently one of the most strategically savvy autocrats in the world (along with Xi which I personally vehemently disagree with but that's another matter for another thread). My contention is that, assuming that his ultimate goal is the power and security of the Russian state under his leadership, Putin is no longer making savvy choices, and stopped doing so the moment he decided it was a good idea to invade Ukraine. I'm not saying that he'd gone completely cuckoo-pants-on-head, but rather that he was no longer making savvy, well-judged decisions - miscalculations, if you like. I think the main difference between our thinking is that you're identifying "the former SSRs being democracies" as, inherently, a threat to Putin and therefore attempting to prevent them from being a democracy being inherently a rational, intelligent choice. My argument is that even if you accepted that the SSRs being democratic was a threat (I'm not really sure about that myself), that threat only matters in the greater context of Russia's power and security and throwing away your power and security for the sake of eliminating democratic SSRs is spending dollars to gain pennies. It cannot be considered a particularly savvy decision. Hell, with Putin's current position it's an open question how long he'll be able to remain in power even - if he successfully installs a puppet autocracy but gets couped under the pressure of the Russian economy imploding beneath him, would it be worth it for him? Edit: Basically what I'm saying is that you can only say that he's a brilliant mastermind if you accept that his end goals are inherently worth any price. By the same token, if I were elected President of the United States, I might personally believe wholeheartedly that American prosperity rests entirely on the military conquest and direct annexation of all of South America. I may be extremely savvy and rational in my choices of how to go about this, but would I necessarily be correct in my initial assessment that this was worth pissing away America's money, power, and international influence over? Edit edit: Come to think of it, better question: Suppose I'm George Bush. I've decided to invade Iraq because I feel it is inherently worth any cost to topple Saddam and bring democracy to Iraq. Even if I was extremely intelligent in how I went about doing so, would invading Iraq be an intelligent choice merely because I believed the end goal to be worth anything? Tomn fucked around with this message at 17:45 on Feb 27, 2022 |
|
#
¿
Feb 27, 2022 17:29
|
|
|
Again, though, I think my issue here is that you seem to be taking Putin's worldview as its own justification - i.e., he believes it, therefore if he acts in accordance with it he's an intelligent, rational actor, and is intellectually justified in making the decisions he makes. My argument is that when weighing the leader of a state and their decision-making, one cannot view him through his own lens but must instead view him through the lens of the country at large. Does Russia truly benefit from such choices? Hell, even if we narrow it down and look at it through the lens of his personal dictatorship, does his rule benefit from such choices? I would argue that the answer is "Not really, and it's getting worse by the day." Two points I want to note specifically, though: Dante posted:I do think Ukraine, being a culturally very influential in Russia, realigning towards the west and continuing its democratic path would be a very serious threat to Putin over time. Ah, now, remember when I said I disagreed vehemently on your judgement of Xi Jinping? I'm Taiwanese, and I was living in Hong Kong when the last crackdown happened. As such, I can state that as far as I can see the continued existence of an independent democratic state of the same culture and ethnicity as the PRC (arguably multiple such, depending on how you view Hong Kong and Singapore) has done all of jack and poo poo to the overall desire of mainlanders to strive for democracy and overthrow the CCP. It's not nearly as much of a real threat to CCP rule as the internal consequences of its own decisions are (such as China's stalling economy and approaching demographic crisis). And on that note... Dante posted:I don't think there's any evidence that Putin's position in Russia is precarious from the losses sustained after 72 hours of war. Hopefully this invasion does destabilize the domestic situation enough that he feels compelled to seek a truce, but I think we're far from that yet. I wasn't really referring to battlefield losses here so much as I was referring to the "nuke the economy" sanctions on the horizon, particularly the one about freezing bank assets. We've already had a few videos in here about how people having been lining up at ATMs to get their money out, and it's only going to get worse once the sanctions hit for real and the markets open. I don't know that Putin's necessarily going to end up out a balcony but "having to deal with massive hyperinflation and oligarchs freaking out over their wealth disappearing" doesn't exactly make for a steady throne to my mind.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 27, 2022 18:07
|
|
|
ummel posted:Belarus pinky promised not to send troops from Belarus Assuming the info about where the missile came from is accurate, what the hell's the point? Why bother? What incredibly critical military target is worth wiping your rear end with peace talks before they've even begun in full view of the world? Almost tempted to wonder if this was accurately identified just because it seems so pointless but there's a lot about this war that seems bloody pointless so idk
|
|
#
¿
Feb 27, 2022 18:31
|
|
|
Tuna-Fish posted:Ukraine alone could never do this, because what would they equip them with? But suddenly there is an answer to that question. That would only matter if Ukraine can maintain organized staging and training areas long enough to get people up to speed while still having access to the population and potential recruits, wouldn't it? I don't know how long it takes to get "fresh volunteer" up to "can stand toe to toe with regulars" level but does Ukraine have that kind of time? I mean, hell, we were talking about some of the Soviet conscripts looking badly undertrained and those guys were recruited in December. Maybe it doesn't take as long to train them up into effective insurgents but I still dunno if talking about the total available military age population is super useful given how fast things are moving.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 27, 2022 19:05
|
|
|
Wuxi posted:It worked for Germany and Japan Those required total occupation of the country and rewriting their constitutions though. I don’t think that’ll be an option with a nuclear power.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 11, 2022 12:20
|
|
|
Man Plan Canal posted:Is it "fake" news? As best as I can tell the lay of the land is that a number of journalistic outlets, starting based on a Reuters story, report seeing internal Meta emails discussing the policy; then asked Meta for comment, then got a comment from a spokesperson acknowledging the truth of the emails and the change in policy. Then someone in this thread works for Meta and asked a contact they had if it was true, and the contact said no. Yeah, I'm starting to wonder about this. The story's been out for a while now and Meta hasn't immediately slapped back hard. You'd think they'd jump right on that PR grenade if it was categorically false. Who was the goon who worked for Meta? They have any updates?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 11, 2022 15:43
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:That feels like armored knights and longbows. Where a longbow handed to a peasant could take down a knight. There is a while they tried adding more and more people to like, clear out archers before the knight arrived and stuff but at some point it became "wait, whats the knight armor even for at this point". So I hang out on the MilHist thread and that is just plain not true. Armor remained relevant well into the gunpowder age, longbows absolutely did not obsolete armor or knights or heavy cavalry in general (and in any event they required a LOT of extensive training to use well, you couldn't just "hand them to a peasant") Also longbows were only particularly relevant in a relative handful of admittedly dramatic battles anyways in wars that were mostly defined by raiding and sieges. There's a reason longbows remain part of a specifically English myth instead of immediately spreading all over Europe as the One Weird Trick To Obsolete Knights (French Nobles Hate Them!) Edit: Also the battles in which longbows featured so heavily included a lot of mud slowing down the knightly charge so relevant to modern events! 
Tomn fucked around with this message at 15:55 on Mar 11, 2022 |
|
#
¿
Mar 11, 2022 15:53
|
|
|
Thoughtless posted:Chances are they meant crossbows, in which case everything they said would be true. You can hand those to peasants and they do indeed punch through armor. Eh, still not really. Again, armor was relevant clear through to the gunpowder age - crossbows CAN punch through armor under the right circumstances (and fairly short range) but it's by no means a sure thing and they definitely didn't obsolete knightly heavy armor. Neither did arquebuses, in fact, to which the same argument applies but even more so - see for instance reiters who were extremely heavily armored and armed with pistols, and who in a cavalry engagement were expected to ride up to their counterparts and push the pistol up against their enemies point-blank before firing as they would be ineffective otherwise. Longbows, crossbows, and guns weren't the immediate "make knights obsolete" button people think they were, and knights faded out only slowly as a combination of incremental technological improvements combined with changes to both society and military organization made them less important over time, and even then "heavy cavalry with armor" was STILL relevant during the Napoleonic Wars in the form of the cuirassiers. Which seems to apply to MBTs as well - they might be less relevant over time with technological advances but we're still probably not going to see an immediate fadeout into irrelevance.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 11, 2022 16:08
|
|
|
Honestly, I'm starting to get the impression that the Kremlin is in full, flailing panic mode now. It's not like any of the decisions made up to this point have been particularly well-judged but there seemed to at least be something of a semblance of a plan, even one badly adapted to the situation. Increasingly it feels like the actions Putin are taking are more random "throw it at a wall and see if it sticks" disjointed nonsense. If those FSB leaks from earlier reflected reality in any way he might be realizing just how little real idea he has of the condition of the Russian state, economy, and army. Feels dangerous, though, this is going to make him even more unpredictable if that's the case and I doubt it'll be in favor of backing down peacefully.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 11, 2022 18:35
|
|
|
Rad Russian posted:Seems like a premature thing for everyone to discuss anyway. Ukraine is still losing territory, albeit slower than expected. The consensus I see from experts say Russia will win if they're willing to siege and shell cities. While their tanks and planes have been a joke, they have an almost unlimited supply of artillery shells using a stock built up over 50 years. Things that don't need any maintenance or electronics. In fairness, though, just because they HAVE the shells doesn't necessarily mean they have the logistical capability to actually get those shells to the front given what a mess Russian logistics has been throughout. I THINK this has been posted before, but this article is a pretty interesting in-depth look at the nature of the Russian logistical system. A couple of key quotes: quote:The Russian army does not have enough trucks to meet its logistic requirement more than 90 miles beyond supply dumps. To reach a 180-mile range, the Russian army would have to double truck allocation to 400 trucks for each of the material-technical support brigades. To gain familiarity with Russian logistic requirements and lift resources, a useful starting point is the Russian combined arms army. They all have different force structures, but on paper, each combined army is assigned a material-technical support brigade. Each material-technical support brigade has two truck battalions with a total of 150 general cargo trucks with 50 trailers and 260 specialized trucks per brigade. The Russian army makes heavy use of tube and rocket artillery fire, and rocket ammunition is very bulky. Although each army is different, there are usually 56 to 90 multiple launch rocket system launchers in an army. Replenishing each launcher takes up the entire bed of the truck. If the combined arms army fired a single volley, it would require 56 to 90 trucks just to replenish rocket ammunition. That is about a half of a dry cargo truck force in the material-technical support brigade just to replace one volley of rockets. There is also between six to nine tube artillery battalions, nine air defense artillery battalions, 12 mechanized and recon battalions, three to five tank battalions, mortars, anti-tank missiles, and small arms ammunition — not to mention, food, engineering, medical supplies, and so on. Those requirements are harder to estimate, but the potential resupply requirements are substantial. The Russian army force needs a lot of trucks just for ammunition and dry cargo replenishment. quote:Logistic planners in Russian Western Command have to plan for a scenario in which Baltic states choose to fight a battle in their capital. Historically, urban combat consumes massive amounts of ammunition and takes months to conclude. During the two most prominent examples, the battles of Grozny in the Chechen wars and the Battle of Mosul in 2016, defenders tied down four to 10 times their numbers for up to four months. At Grozny, Russians were firing up to 4,000 shells a day — that’s 50 trucks a day. quote:The ammunition consumption would be massive. During the 2008 Russo-Georgian War, some Russian forces expended an entire basic load of ammunition in 12 hours. Assuming the same rates, the Russians would have to replace substantial amounts of ammunition every 12 to 24 hours. If the Ukrainians can consistently blow up Russian trucks (and they've shown no signs of stopping yet) bombing Kyiv into the ground might prove more difficult than it seems on paper.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 11, 2022 19:12
|
|
|
with a rebel yell she QQd posted:Had a call with my in-laws from Russia. It's really sad. my father in law has explained how the US can't have biological weapon factories on their territories that's why they built them in Ukraine. Also said that Hungary and Poland should have just occupied western Ukraine and all this would be over quickly with everyone happy, in fact this is still an option and the EU or NATO wouldn't do anything about it. Honestly this is something I find disturbing not just in Russia but in China as well - average people just openly accepting that great power imperialism and naked landgrabs because "We can and what are you going to do about it?" is normalized and justifiable. Like, US imperialism is a thing for sure but there's at least a sense that it should be justified on moral or even legal terms somehow. There's a subset of people in China (and apparently Russia too I guess) that accept that "we're strong and they're weak" is all the justification necessary, and I find that worrying. Granted it's not universal by any means but it's way more common than I'm comfortable with.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 12, 2022 15:06
|
|
|
greazeball posted:The moral and legal justification for the last few American military involvements is shaky at best. We just did a better job of making sure everyone had decided to believe our bullshit before we started dropping bombs. It's disturbing to see happen again and yeah it's probably more blatant fabrication this time but it's only a difference of degree (and success). Yeah, like I said it's not an excuse for American imperialism but there is at least a fig leaf of a justification, a sense that some justification IS necessary - which can at least theoretically allow for social pushback on such adventurism and provide some degree of a brake, even if not much of one sometimes. What worries me is average people on the street who don't think justification is necessary to begin with, that it can and should be OK to go full mask-off from the word go. If that spreads much then you've got no brakes at all except whether the leadership thinks they can pull it off or not, which as we're seeing can go horribly, disastrously wrong for everyone involved. Though that being said... Tigey posted:I agree that such things are disturbing and piss me off everytime I read them (and bode ominously for the future), but I think you are underestimating the extent to which such views exist among similar subsets of people in the West too. I can't remember the details but at one point Trump started ranting about how the US should seize the oil and gas fields in Syria/Afghanistan/Iraq/insert nation here. No justification, just naked resource grabbing. And it was popular with his base. Fair, I guess that does exist in the West as well though I still think the proportion is smaller from what I've seen. Agreed that all such are terrible no matter where they are.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 12, 2022 15:32
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 10, 2024 02:12 |
|
|
PederP posted:It also plays an important role in attracting foreign currency and international investments. If you want to buy Russian stocks you need to pay for them in rubles, so you need to buy rubles with some yuan, rupees, pesos, etc. Keeping it closed indefinitely hampers any attempt to attract what little foreign currency they can get from non-exports. However, they might also *want* to avoid international investors (ie China, Middle-East, India, Indonesia) vacuuming up everything. It's better to get the nationalization and confiscation business out of the way before that, since current shareholders are likely mostly western. How much does the stock market actually invest in the real economy, though? I don't know much about stocks, but my understanding is that only the IPO really sees money going directly to the company in question, and afterwards they'll only see more money if the company sells more of its shares, which comes with its own dangers if it allows someone to become a majority stakeholder. Isn't every other stock activity basically traders buying and selling from each other for arbitrage purposes without the money ever seeing anyone but the stock traders themselves, with the company itself only indirectly affected by the value of the shares they hold going up or down? Again, I know very little about financing and stocks, just wondering how much the stock market actually helps with foreign investments in the country.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 12, 2022 19:48
|
|