- HonorableTB
- Dec 22, 2006
-
|
Welcome back friends
|
#
¿
Mar 5, 2023 20:34
|
|
- Adbot
-
ADBOT LOVES YOU
|
|
|
#
¿
May 14, 2024 14:25
|
|
- HonorableTB
- Dec 22, 2006
-
|
Just an aside, some people might find NAFO cringe. Sure sure. But NAFO came about to troll russian disinformation on twitter for example I'm fairly sure and not to make light of war.
This is accurate. NAFO is pretty much a counterforce for Russian disinformation and propaganda. It's harder for things to stick if all their channels are clogged with cartoon dogs calling them idiots
|
|
#
¿
Mar 5, 2023 20:38
|
|
- HonorableTB
- Dec 22, 2006
-
|
I can't think of any reason but poison for why a fat 44 year old alcoholics kidneys might be shutting down
|
|
#
¿
Mar 5, 2023 20:43
|
|
- HonorableTB
- Dec 22, 2006
-
|
so whose balls are getting nuked this Tuesday?
Always Willo567
In other news, Solovyov nearly got himself aced in Vuhledar:
https://charter97.org/en/news/2023/3/5/538749/
article posted:
The film crew was sent under artillery fire personally by the head of the Russian General Staff Valery Gerasimov.
The scandal with the "shell hunger" and the huge losses of the invaders' units near Vuhledar became so resonant that, instead of ammunition, they sent propagandist Vladimir Solovyov to the invaders.
According to the VChK-OGPU project, it was the head of the Russian General Staff Valery Gerasimov who personally ordered to send Solovyov to Vuhledar. The propagandist had to be escorted to the outskirts of the city for the credibility of his stories.
"After a public scandal due to the gigantic losses of the Marines of the 155th brigade, a decision was made to support the morale of the unit. As a gift, they decided to organize a visit of ... Vladimir Solovyov. The sanction for arrival was personally signed by the chief of the General Staff, who was authorized to ensure the safety of Solovyov's stay in the combat zone, in the immediate vicinity of Vuhledar. But, as the VChK-OGPU found out, everything did not go according to the plan. The country almost lost its main propagandist," the report says.
As the project writes, by a strange coincidence, with the arrival of Solovyov at the location of the marines, an artillery strike was carried out on the settlement of their location. There were allegedly no casualties, but "Solovyov's motivational speech turned out to be somewhat blurry."
After the shelling of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, the film crew had to "create an edited version of inspiring shots with fearless marines who are ready to storm without any artillery support" in a short time.
The project notes that Solovyov’s visit near Vuhledar was also due to the fact that the day before, the commander of the marine brigade flatly refused to send fighters for the assault until the claimed ammunition load was at his disposal, despite intimidation by senior commanders to send him onto the carpet to report to Gerasimov.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 5, 2023 21:55
|
|
- HonorableTB
- Dec 22, 2006
-
|
Prigozhin is making strange threats that I don't think he's really in the position to be making.
https://twitter.com/wartranslated/status/1632148708748935168?s=20
That's quite the implied threat to Gerasimov and Shoigu. With Kadyrov recently poisoned (which is interesting because Kadyrov himself reported that one of his top generals had been poisoned recently, his own poisoning shouldn't be a surprise..), Prigozhin seems to be digging himself into a hole that may turn out to be a tunnel or his own grave, depending on how Bakhmut turns out. If Bakhmut doesn't fall to Wagner or the RUAF, Prigozhin's days are numbered
Edit: christ prigozhin always talks like he's got a bunch of marbles in his mouth
HonorableTB fucked around with this message at 22:10 on Mar 5, 2023
|
|
#
¿
Mar 5, 2023 22:07
|
|
- HonorableTB
- Dec 22, 2006
-
|
It's unfortunate about the mobiks but ultimately there's nothing we can do about them and they are, at the end of the day, the ground forces of the aggressor state participating in an illegal invasion during a war of imperialistic expansion. You can feel bad about the mobiks who don't have a choice, nobody's stopping you from feeling that way, but at the end of the day the Russian armed forces are - indeed - The Baddies.
HonorableTB fucked around with this message at 22:33 on Mar 5, 2023
|
|
#
¿
Mar 5, 2023 22:17
|
|
- HonorableTB
- Dec 22, 2006
-
|
Lol. Companies have to buy their own air defense systems?
What's next will they have to buy their own conscripts to defend their stores/warehouses? This is loving insanity.
What is going to be like Russian Prada puts out an ad for air defense operators?
we've been living in the metal gear universe for a long time, i thought people figured that out when the villain in MGS:R was dick cheney with nanobots
|
|
#
¿
Mar 5, 2023 22:32
|
|
- HonorableTB
- Dec 22, 2006
-
|
The poster you are responding to is a resident of St Petersburg.
The imperial centers of Moscow and St Petersburg absolutely receive preferential treatment when it comes to conscription. Here, check out this map of where troops have been conscripted from to get a better idea - these were mapped due to casualty counts
A resident in SPb or Moscow would have a much different experience simply refusing a conscription order than a resident of Tuva or Buryatia. When I lived in Russia I was based out of Saint Petersburg and the stark contrast between SPb and even a respectably sized city like Arkangelsk or Irkutsk in terms of sheer wealth and modernization was, at times, stunning. If you go 15 miles outside of Samara you start encountering dirt roads, for example. The cities are the only places of influence in Russia and of the cities only two actually matter and those are St Petersburg and Moscow. Everything else is distinctly on lower levels and that level drops the further east you go, with a few odd cities like Krasnoyarsk, Irkutsk, Vladivostok where they served as provincial imperial centers for administration historically and needed a higher level of development as Russia expanded eastward
HonorableTB fucked around with this message at 23:18 on Mar 5, 2023
|
|
#
¿
Mar 5, 2023 23:11
|
|
- HonorableTB
- Dec 22, 2006
-
|
you know if there's a more recent version of that chart (that one is from may 22)? I'd be really curious to see what it looks like at this point after a conscription wave and the mobilization wave
Yes! I went looking and was eventually able to find one from 24 Feb 2023, aggregating 1 year
Analysis posted:
Map uses figures for identified dead Russian soldiers reported by BBC News Russia and Mediazona, based on finding their obituaries or other announcements about their deaths. There are currently about 15000 identified soldiers. Black and red means higher losses per population in a region, blue and green means lower losses. This is only a fraction of the total losses, but they should be representative because the identification is distributed randomly. I.e., it is unlikely that men from Moscow are less likely to have an obituary than men from Altai.
Here is a similar map for 9th September 2022: link
And for 10th May 2022: link
Observations
Moscow continues to be by far the lowest contributor, pushing even further ahead of other areas. It has only 98 casualties, even though proportionally it should have had about 1400. The highest casualties are for the Tuvan Republic, which also happens to have consistently the highest homicide rates in Russia. The likelihood for a Tuvan to die in the war is about 70 times higher than for a Muscovite. This is probably because proportionally, many more Tuvans serve in the army because they see it as a "social lift".
Another comparison is that if we take the top 20 regions by casualty rate, they would have 13m population and 2996 identified deaths, compared to Moscow's 12.5m and 98 deaths.
There is a correlation with income, although some poor regions like Ingushetia have a low rate. Oil-rich regions have a lower rate, but still not as low as Moscow despite being technically slightly richer (so HDI is probably the better predictor).
Largest contributors to casualties per capita:
Tuva Republic 52.91
Buryatia 46.00
Nenets Autonomous Okrug 38.17
Magadan Oblast 37.74
Zabaykalsky Krai 30.57
Lowest contributors to casualties per capita:
Moscow 0.78
Saint Petersburg 2.44
Tyumen Oblast 3.42
Moscow Oblast 3.60
Khanty-Mansiysk Autonomous Okrug – Ugra 5.87
Highest overall contributors:
Krasnodar Krai 617
Sverdlovsk Oblast 568
Chelyabinsk Oblast 477
Bashkortostan 473
Buryatia 452 HonorableTB fucked around with this message at 23:22 on Mar 5, 2023
|
|
#
¿
Mar 5, 2023 23:19
|
|
- HonorableTB
- Dec 22, 2006
-
|
I find it hard to come up with a palatable scenario that can lead to peace in our time.
However it ends, it starts with Russia being forced out of Ukraine and returning Crimea and the Donbas to Ukrainian hands. Any peace deal which rewards naked imperialistic aggression with concessions is guaranteed to lead to a future war because Putin would rightfully believe he can get away with it. You have to draw the line somewhere and it might as well be Ukraine
|
|
#
¿
Mar 5, 2023 23:37
|
|
- HonorableTB
- Dec 22, 2006
-
|
I think it is also worth reiterating how hard Russia shat the bed overall, even if Putin snaps his fingers and all Ukrainian resistance vanishes.
- You have a poo poo-rear end war with a bunch of people and equipment destroyed/captured that will take a lot of time and money to replace, greatly stifling the threat of Russia doing this again, at least in the short term
- you have a domestic economy ruined via sanctions which aren't going away any time soon(the reverse/deindustrialization comment by economists) on top of a bunch of people running away from Russia and likely won't return, as well as everybody who gets drafted and dies is one less person making pizzas or teaching algebra or researching new types of concrete etc
- you have Sweden and Finland (eventually) becoming NATO members so NATO's influence is expanding instead of Russia's
- you have united a whole bunch of countries actively taking measures against Russia by refusing to do business with Russia and/or giving more aid to Ukraine on top of slowly weening themselves off of Russian energy, Russia's biggest/most lucrative market.
- Plus who is gonna buy Russian hardware when most of it has gotten destroyed/captured in Ukraine, and whatever is in reserve is probably all skimmed-off-the-top to death.
- No loving way Ukraine is also going to stop and roll over on any of Russia's terms that doesn't start with recreating the 2014 maps and going from there
Even in the worst case scenario of Russia somehow engulfing most of Ukraine with dominant military victories I really, really don't see what beneficial things Putin accomplished other than misery for its own sake in an attempt to chase the dream of a long-gone empire like the world never advanced beyond the year 1762 or whatever.
literally the worst possible outcome has happened for putin's objectives at every juncture with regards to his geopolitical strategic goals for russia
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2023 00:24
|
|
- HonorableTB
- Dec 22, 2006
-
|
Scholz said that China declared that it wouldn't send weapons to Russia, so I for one look forward to when ol Olaf gets rolled yet again
https://www.politico.eu/article/china-ukraine-war-russia-weapon-deliveries-scholz-putin-zelenskyy-xi-jinping/
quote:MESEBERG, Germany — German Chancellor Olaf Scholz on Sunday said China had declared it won’t supply Russia with weapons for its war against Ukraine, suggesting that Berlin has received bilateral assurances from Beijing on the issue.
Scholz was speaking at a press conference with European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, who told reporters that the EU has received “no evidence” so far from the U.S. that Beijing is considering supplying lethal support to Moscow.
Senior U.S. officials including Secretary of State Antony Blinken have expressed deep concern in recent weeks that China could provide weapons such as kamikaze drones to Russia, which in turn triggered warnings to Beijing from EU politicians. Scholz himself urged Beijing last week to refrain from such actions and instead use its influence to convince Russia to withdraw its troops from Ukraine.
Yet speaking at Sunday’s press conference, which was held at the German government retreat in Meseberg north of Berlin, Scholz claimed that China had provided assurances that it would not send weapons to Russia.
“We all agree that there should be no arms deliveries, and the Chinese government has declared that it will not deliver any either,” the chancellor said in response to a question by POLITICO. “We insist on this and we are monitoring it,” he added.
Scholz’s comments came as a surprise because China has not publicly rejected the possibility of weapons deliveries to Russia. The chancellor appeared to suggest that Beijing had issued such reassurances directly to Germany.
EU foreign policy chief Josep Borrell received similar private assurances last month. Borrell told reporters that China’s top diplomat Wang Yi had told him in a private discussion at the Munich Security Conference in mid-February that China “will not provide arms to Russia.”
“Nevertheless, we have to remain vigilant,” Borrell said.
Von der Leyen, who attended the first day of a two-day German government retreat in Meseberg, told reporters that the EU still had not seen any proof that China is considering sending arms to Russia.
“So far, we have no evidence of this, but we have to observe it every day,” the Commission president said. She did not reply to the question on whether the EU would support sanctions against China should there be such weapon deliveries, saying that was a “hypothetical question” she would not answer.
Also some more bavovna happened:
https://www.pravda.com.ua/eng/news/2023/03/5/7392099/
quote:An explosion has occurred in a workshop belonging to the Moscow Coke and Gas Plant in the town of Vidnoye near Moscow.
Source: Kremlin-aligned news outlet TASS, referencing the press service of the regional directorate of the Russian Emergencies Ministry
Quote: "Town district of Vidnoye, 13 Belokamennoye highway (coke and gas plant), a bang in the workshop. A petrol hand pump is on fire <...>. A 20-by-10-metre, 20-metre-high building is on fire," the source said.
Details: According to a TASS source in the emergency services, the fire has engulfed an area of 200 square metres, that is, the entire building.
For reference: Moscow Coke and Gas Plant JSC (Moskoks) produces coke, benzene and coal tar. The company is part of Mechel PJSC.
Ukraine included the company in its sanctions list on 29 January 2023.
Updated Russian losses:
HonorableTB fucked around with this message at 01:25 on Mar 6, 2023
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2023 01:23
|
|
- HonorableTB
- Dec 22, 2006
-
|
You can give him the Rush Limbaugh treatment. The architects of this fascist colonial war are deserving of no withholding at all when they bite it because the blood of their own country and another innocent one is directly on their hands.
I don't wish death upon anyone, but I'm not going to feel bad when evil people that consider the common man disposable are gone.
i'll have to start drinking water now if i'm gonna give him the rush limbaugh treatment, i wont have nearly enough pee otherwise
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2023 02:14
|
|
- HonorableTB
- Dec 22, 2006
-
|
Further shaping operations in the Melitopol direction have occured. Two Russian bases have been destroyed according to the Melitopol mayor
https://twitter.com/KyivIndependent/status/1632527954201698304?s=20
https://www.ukrinform.ua/rubric-ato/3678597-zsu-znisili-dvi-vijskovi-bazi-zagarbnikiv-u-melitopoli-fedorov.html
This is just adding more weight to my feeling that the Ukrainian spring counteroffensive is aimed at severing the land bridge to Crimea
it's definitely a complex issue but at the end of the game the team with the most kills on the board is going to win.
im glad we have this thread back to joke and chill and post and keep track of the k/d ratios in. hopefully we can keep the blood and guts and veins in our imaginations and not get it closed by linking our liveleak fave lists 
This is a weird post. War is not a team sport and nobody here is acting like it is.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2023 03:26
|
|
- HonorableTB
- Dec 22, 2006
-
|
It feels like every day on the news that they're declaring that Bakhmut has fallen only for an update each night that the fighting is continuing.
That's because Bakhmut's purpose has changed several times over the course of the war. It has been a prepared defensive position even before the 2022 invasion, and when Ukraine retreated from Severodonetsk, Bakhmut was the planned fallback position. It's first purpose was to attrit Russian forces, which was much less strategically important compared to the Kherson and Kharkiv counteroffensives (and indeed was crucial to the Kharkiv counteroffensive because the Bakhmut actions during the summer of 2022 drastically depleted the Russian forces in Bakhmut oblast to compensate, opening the door for Ukrainian advancement).
Bakhmut's purpose transformed most recently about a month or two ago, or when you (in general) noticed the shift in the coverage on Bakhmut and how it is now being portrayed as a very strategically important place, contrary to the last year of the war. It switched from an attrition generator to a force-pinner. The Russians engaged at Bakhmut can't be sent or used elsewhere, and they're being mulched on the daily. Bakhmut is now strategically important because once again it is the fulcrum on which Ukrainian counter-offensives operate on, and this time it's going to be towards the Sea of Azov. The more Russians are at Bakhmut, the fewer there are elsewhere.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2023 04:59
|
|
- HonorableTB
- Dec 22, 2006
-
|
Unfortunately, by making this such a drawn-out debacle there are now more disingenuous tourism posts than genuine ones, and little motivation to tackle them when everyone knows how much time and energy those involved have for whipping up a giant melodramatic shitfit on challenge.
For what it's worth the VFW thread seems to be immune to this kind of bait, and is not currently the bête noire of tedious goblins who are only here to generate Premium Content for the boys back at Goblin HQ, so good luck... but no thank you.
Stop contributing to the bullshit and post content then
MAPS:
https://twitter.com/War_Mapper/status/1632531935808421890?s=20
Interactive time-lapse of the war by the ISW:
https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/733fe90805894bfc8562d90b106aa895
Soundtrack for reading:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OmqLVrUXsTQ
HonorableTB fucked around with this message at 06:33 on Mar 6, 2023
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2023 06:28
|
|
- HonorableTB
- Dec 22, 2006
-
|
Reminder that Russian state media accidentally released their Ukrainian Solution manifesto and quickly deleted it once it was clear the 3 day special military operation was utterly hosed
https://web.archive.org/web/20220226051154/https://ria.ru/20220226/rossiya-1775162336.html
The offensive of Russia and the new world posted:
A new world is being born before our eyes. Russia's military operation in Ukraine has ushered in a new era - and in three dimensions at once. And of course, in the fourth, internal Russian. Here begins a new period both in ideology and in the very model of our socio-economic system - but this is worth talking about separately a little later.
Russia is restoring its unity - the tragedy of 1991, this terrible catastrophe in our history, its unnatural dislocation, has been overcome. Yes, at a great cost, yes, through the tragic events of an actual civil war, because now brothers, divided by belonging to the Russian and Ukrainian armies, are still shooting at each other, but there will be no more Ukraine as anti-Russia. Russia is restoring its historical fullness, gathering the Russian world, the Russian people together - in all its totality of Great Russians, Belarusians and Little Russians. If we had abandoned this, if we had allowed the temporary division to take hold for centuries, then we would not only betray the memory of our ancestors, but would also be cursed by our descendants for allowing the disintegration of the Russian land.
Vladimir Putin has assumed, without a drop of exaggeration, a historic responsibility by deciding not to leave the solution of the Ukrainian question to future generations. After all, the need to solve it would always remain the main problem for Russia - for two key reasons. And the issue of national security, that is, the creation of anti-Russia from Ukraine and an outpost for the West to put pressure on us, is only the second most important among them.
The first would always be the complex of a divided people, the complex of national humiliation - when the Russian house first lost part of its foundation (Kiev), and then was forced to come to terms with the existence of two states, not one, but two peoples. That is, either to abandon their history, agreeing with the insane versions that "only Ukraine is the real Rus'," or to gnash one's teeth helplessly, remembering the times when "we lost Ukraine." Returning Ukraine, that is, turning it back to Russia, would be more and more difficult with every decade - recoding, de-Russification of Russians and inciting Ukrainian Little Russians against Russians would gain momentum.
Now this problem is gone - Ukraine has returned to Russia. This does not mean that its statehood will be liquidated, but it will be reorganized, re-established and returned to its natural state of part of the Russian world. Within what borders, in what form will the alliance with Russia be fixed (through the CSTO and the Eurasian Union or the Union State of Russia and Belarus )? This will be decided after the end is put in the history of Ukraine as anti-Russia. In any case, the period of the split of the Russian people is coming to an end.
And here begins the second dimension of the coming new era - it concerns Russia's relations with the West. Not even Russia, but the Russian world, that is, three states, Russia, Belarus and Ukraine, acting in geopolitical terms as a single whole. These relations have entered a new stage - the West sees the return of Russia to its historical borders in Europe . And he is loudly indignant at this, although in the depths of his soul he must admit to himself that it could not be otherwise.
Did someone in the old European capitals, in Paris and Berlin , seriously believe that Moscow would give up Kiev ? That the Russians will forever be a divided people? And at the same time when Europe is uniting, when the German and French elites are trying to seize control of European integration from the Anglo-Saxons and assemble a united Europe? Forgetting that the unification of Europe became possible only thanks to the unification of Germany, which happened according to the good Russian (albeit not very smart) will. To swipe after that also on Russian lands is not even the height of ingratitude, but of geopolitical stupidity. The West as a whole, and even more so Europe in particular, did not have the strength to keep Ukraine in its sphere of influence, and even more so to take Ukraine for itself. In order not to understand this, one had to be just geopolitical fools.
More precisely, there was only one option: to bet on the further collapse of Russia, that is, the Russian Federation. But the fact that it did not work should have been clear twenty years ago. And already fifteen years ago, after Putin's Munich speech, even the deaf could hear - Russia is returning.
Russia brought to Ukraine an agreement to organize negotiations, said Peskov
Now the West is trying to punish Russia for the fact that it returned, for not justifying its plans to profit at its expense, for not allowing the expansion of the western space to the east. Seeking to punish us, the West thinks that relations with it are of vital importance to us. But this has not been the case for a long time - the world has changed, and this is well understood not only by Europeans, but also by the Anglo-Saxons who rule the West. No amount of Western pressure on Russia will lead to anything. Losses from the sublimation of confrontation will be on both sides, but Russia is ready for them morally and geopolitically. But for the West itself, an increase in the degree of confrontation incurs huge costs - and the main ones are not at all economic.
Europe, as part of the West, wanted autonomy - the German project of European integration does not make strategic sense while maintaining the Anglo-Saxon ideological, military and geopolitical control over the Old World. Yes, and it cannot be successful, because the Anglo-Saxons need a controlled Europe. But Europe needs autonomy for another reason as well — in case the States go into self-isolation (as a result of growing internal conflicts and contradictions) or focus on the Pacific region, where the geopolitical center of gravity is moving.
But the confrontation with Russia, into which the Anglo-Saxons are dragging Europe, deprives the Europeans of even the chance of independence - not to mention the fact that in the same way Europe is trying to impose a break with China . If now the Atlanticists are happy that the "Russian threat" will unite the Western bloc, then in Berlin and Paris they cannot but understand that, having lost hope for autonomy, the European project will simply collapse in the medium term. That is why independent-minded Europeans are now completely uninterested in building a new iron curtain on their eastern borders - realizing that it will turn into a corral for Europe. Whose century (more precisely, half a millennium) of global leadership is over in any case - but various options for its future are still possible.
Because the construction of a new world order - and this is the third dimension of current events - is accelerating, and its contours are more and more clearly visible through the spreading cover of Anglo-Saxon globalization. A multipolar world has finally become a reality - the operation in Ukraine is not capable of rallying anyone but the West against Russia. Because the rest of the world sees and understands perfectly well - this is a conflict between Russia and the West, this is a response to the geopolitical expansion of the Atlanticists, this is Russia's return of its historical space and its place in the world.
China and India , Latin America and Africa , the Islamic world and Southeast Asia - no one believes that the West leads the world order, much less sets the rules of the game. Russia has not only challenged the West, it has shown that the era of Western global domination can be considered completely and finally over. The new world will be built by all civilizations and centers of power, naturally, together with the West (united or not) - but not on its terms and not according to its rules.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2023 06:36
|
|
- HonorableTB
- Dec 22, 2006
-
|
Is this a new thing in Russia that only really started with Putin? The "everyone is trying to attack us all the time" thing? It sure seems like there's a lot more bloviating about other countries doing what they want and it being an attack on Russian ideals recently, even before 2022.
No, the Russian state apparatus has more or less always been on the paranoid side of things (getting repeatedly invaded by external forces for several hundred years will do that), but what you're seeing there didn't really start until the post-WW2 years as the USSR recovered from the trauma of losing 25-30 million people in the war. And from there on the Russian state never really fully recovered and the paranoia has ramped up quite a lot (to the extent you see in that article) with Putin. He has been remarkably consistent about his views on Ukraine dating back to at least 2008 (the most I can find with a cursory search), he has always viewed Ukraine the way he does now. One of the main drivers for Putin's beliefs here is a man named Alexander Dugin and his philosophy, I can do an effort post about Dugin later if anyone wants
If it's helpful, keep this in your mind: modern Russian governments (1991-onward), the closer you get to Putin's current reign, "enemies out to get us" pretty much means "anyone doing anything Russia doesn't like". They define "nazis" the same way - to Putin and his kind, "nazi" is just anyone not bowing to what the Kremlin wants, and they must be denazified.
poo poo's weird
HonorableTB fucked around with this message at 08:17 on Mar 6, 2023
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2023 06:42
|
|
- HonorableTB
- Dec 22, 2006
-
|
PLEASE do not resurrect this poo poo, it was insufferable when vampire panties did it nonstop and it's insufferable now
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2023 17:04
|
|
- HonorableTB
- Dec 22, 2006
-
|
You know this is GBS right and not GiP/DnD?
Yes, it's still dumb as hell
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2023 17:13
|
|
- HonorableTB
- Dec 22, 2006
-
|
Russia's 155th Brigade is refusing to carry out orders to capture Vuhledar.
Kyiv Independent posted:
As the atrociously bloody battle for Bakhmut continues and attention focuses on whether Ukraine can hold on to the city, a little further to the south in the east of the country, another potentially far-reaching drama is unfolding.
According to Ukrainian authorities, commanders of Russia’s 155th Naval Infantry Brigade of the Pacific Fleet are now refusing to carry out the Kremlin’s orders.
What is the 155th Brigade?
The 155th Brigade is a Russian marine infantry brigade that was formed in 2009 based in Vladivostok. On paper at least, it was viewed as an elite unit that saw action in the Russian campaign in support of the dictator Bashar al-Assad in Syria and was a leading formation during the Kremlin’s original full-scale invasion of Ukraine.
So, what happened?
Ukrainian forces have nearly wiped out the brigade; several times. A Ukrainian journalist wrote on Facebook on 13 March 2022: “Units of the 155th separate marine brigade have been almost completely destroyed by the Ukrainian Armed Forces. It has been reported that as a result of poor decisions by brigade commanders, about 600 soldiers have been killed and as many injured. At the same time, the remaining personnel currently have no access to food and housing.”
Things didn’t get any better for the 155th Brigade as the war dragged on. In November, after continued heavy fighting in the Donetsk region, Russian servicemen wrote an open letter to Vladimir Putin in which they said they had lost 300 men in just four days of fighting. They blamed the military high command for the losses and requested an independent commission to investigate what was going wrong.
How is the brigade still functioning?
According to the Institute for the Study of War (ISW), the 155th Brigade has been reconstituted as much as seven times since the start of Russia’s full-scale invasion. A once elite unit is now made up almost entirely of poorly equipped conscripts. The ISW adds: “The combat effectiveness of this committed formation is likely negligible.”
What is it currently doing?
The 155th Brigade is part of the Russian assault on the eastern Ukrainian town of Vuhledar where it continues to suffer heavy losses. Social media is littered with videos reportedly showing the unit’s tanks and infantry fighting vehicles being destroyed by Ukrainian forces.
What’s the current situation around Vuhledar?
It has been reported that Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu has instructed his commanders to take Vuhledar at any cost which, for the 155th Brigade, would likely mean yet another incredibly costly offensive, with huge loss if life for little consequence.
The end result is an apparent mutiny in the works. A statement from a Ukrainian military spokesman said: "The leaders of the brigade and senior officers are refusing to proceed with a new senseless attack as demanded by their unskilled commanders - to storm well-defended Ukrainian positions with little protection or preparation".
Military analyst Oleg Zhdanov has reported that two "Cossack" Russian units, known as “Steppe and Tiger”, had also refused to participate on the new offensive on the hilltop town.
According to the ISW: “Russian forces are highly unlikely to be able to conduct any concentrated offensive effort with the current demoralized and degraded forces in the Vuhledar area.”
What’s going to happen next?
That’s unclear but the British Military analyst, Justin Crump, said: "Repeating the same thing time after time and hoping for a different outcome is a sign of madness.
It is his view and that of other Western analysts, as well as irate Russian military bloggers, that any further attempts by the 155th Brigade to take Vuhledar would be “ simply suicidal”.
Perhaps this is why its a bad idea to conduct unsupported human wave attacks 
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2023 17:30
|
|
- HonorableTB
- Dec 22, 2006
-
|
They were supported. It's just that the support is now mostly smoldering wreckage in minefields because of poor tactics and recon or destroyed by counterbattery fire.
so, unsupported 
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2023 17:43
|
|
- HonorableTB
- Dec 22, 2006
-
|
I'm sure they got plenty of moral support. Those sausages and half-hearted, hastily thrown together USO shows in mud fields had to count for something, right?
fish brick's in the pochta
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2023 17:57
|
|
- HonorableTB
- Dec 22, 2006
-
|
Everyone talks about how Russia has taken extreme losses trying to capture Bakhmut but nobody ever clarifies what qualifies as extreme. Do we have any actual idea numbers wise as to what they've thrown at it?
They're eating a casualty ratio of 7:1 against the Ukrainians, and the Ukrainians say they have lost between 10,000-20,000 troops killed at Bakhmut. Extrapolate out from there
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2023 18:59
|
|
- HonorableTB
- Dec 22, 2006
-
|
Bakhmut also is extremely fortified and has extensive tunnels iirc and has been designed this way for years. It's easily possible that no cities west of Bakhmut have the same quantity of fortifications and it's not great that they're abandoning it
It's also probably not great for the russians that it took them 7 months to do so
There are multiple lines of defense west of Bakhmut that have been prepared alongside the front fortifications. That area is one of the most heavily fortified in the world right now, I'd say. If the Russians take Bakhmut then congrats, now do it again at Ivanivske, Mykolaivka, and Kostyantnyivka.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2023 19:17
|
|
- HonorableTB
- Dec 22, 2006
-
|
mod edit: For the love of god no the DeviantArt thread is thattaway
(USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
lmao i can only imagine what the gently caress that was
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2023 20:54
|
|
- HonorableTB
- Dec 22, 2006
-
|
It was funny, but at the same time,
you broke your little ships
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2023 21:03
|
|
- HonorableTB
- Dec 22, 2006
-
|
Back to a serious topic, the unarmed Ukrainian POW that the Russian soldiers filmed themselves murdering has become an instantly viral martyr. It spread so fast it's now on western mainstream media
https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/russian-soldiers-execute-ukrainian-pow-135000255.html
Russia's created an instant rallying figure, you really cannot get a more perfect encapsulation of this war than invaders making an unarmed prisoner dig his own grave and then killing him for saying Glory to Ukraine.
Also new ISW dropped:
https://twitter.com/TheStudyofWar/status/1632737247492550658?t=kaFq-deTQZmcfcnPLL677Q&s=19
https://twitter.com/TheStudyofWar/status/1632737251032432641?t=lk6j1UbJFNxtCUK9EsCoZQ&s=19
https://twitter.com/TheStudyofWar/status/1632737254006304768?t=pnyedoQQbVEfEqSsVk38Jw&s=19
https://twitter.com/TheStudyofWar/status/1632737257462415360?t=tgaSTQh0qO-T4EHpNbgJUw&s=19
https://twitter.com/TheStudyofWar/status/1632737259072942081?t=CRt0zbuJqYu3fr6VBcVeTA&s=19
HonorableTB fucked around with this message at 21:14 on Mar 6, 2023
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2023 21:06
|
|
- HonorableTB
- Dec 22, 2006
-
|
That's the worst looking neo-Confederate flag variant I've seen yet.
yes i know its the flag of novorossiya
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2023 21:57
|
|
- HonorableTB
- Dec 22, 2006
-
|
I just don't see a scenario where Ukraine ever has control over Donbas and Crimea again for the foreseeable future
Hah that reminds me, I wonder if Toxxes are in effect for this iteration of the thread. I remember a lot of posts like this about all of the places theyve taken back so far and some of them spawned Toxxes for donations to Ukrainian charities for the loser. Donbas, for sure. Crimea? That one I'm a lot less sure about.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2023 22:00
|
|
- HonorableTB
- Dec 22, 2006
-
|
I'm not saying Ukraine couldn't take Crimea if they wanted to, it would just take a staggering amount of casualties to do so. And there's always the specter of Clancychat looming over the horizon when dealing with Crimea, much more than anywhere else. Crimea, much like Tahiti, is a magical place in the minds of many Russians (especially in the government) that totally belongs to Russia and always has - even Navalny supported the annexation of Crimea (which should also say a lot about Navalny and liberals in Russian politics, but different topic for a different thread)
In any case, maybe they won't have to if they sever the land bridge. But I do not see any circumstance in which Russia abandons Sevastopol. It's their only yearlong ice-free deep water port and the HQ of the Black Sea fleet. It's about as core a Russian interest as they come. But now we're getting way out into the weeds so I'll bring it back
HonorableTB fucked around with this message at 23:27 on Mar 6, 2023
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2023 23:24
|
|
- HonorableTB
- Dec 22, 2006
-
|
Who considers Navalny liberal?
well he's the head of a center-left opposition party i'd say that qualifies
also jacobin and other outlets writing things like this:
https://jacobin.com/2021/01/alexei-navalny-russia-protests-putin
How a Russian Nationalist Named Alexei Navalny Became a Liberal Hero posted:
The arrest of Russian opposition leader Alexei Navalny has sparked mass protests against Vladimir Putin's authoritarianism. Navalny's journalism has highlighted the cronyism of Russia's elites — but his chameleon-like shifts between liberalism and anti-immigrant nationalism show he's no champion of working-class Russians.
powerful liberal energy
Also here's another article about what he's been up to lately
Alexei Navalny's Big Shift on Crimea posted:
Last week, in an encouraging development where Russia’s internal politics are concerned, Russian opposition leader Alexei Navalny unveiled a series of “theses” outlining what a post-Putin Russia should look like. In so doing, Navalny finally clarified his position on the one issue that has, for some time now, driven a wedge between him and Western allies, especially those in Ukraine: Russian imperialism—and, more specifically, the fate of Crimea.
Over a series of Twitter posts, Navalny announced that Crimea should be returned to Ukraine, full stop. Navalny wrote that Ukraine’s borders are “similar to Russia’s—[they were] internationally recognized and defined in 1991.” All of the areas of Ukraine that the Kremlin has supposedly “annexed” are, by right and by law, still Ukrainian, including Crimea.
The announcement is the conclusion of a years-long song and dance Navalny and his supporters have performed in relation to the peninsula’s future. For nearly a decade, Navalny’s stance on Crimea has been “ambiguous,” as The Moscow Times recently reported. And while Westerners feted Navalny for his ongoing bravery, Ukrainians were rightly infuriated by his relative coyness about the fate of the peninsula. (When an interviewer asked whether Navalny would, if elected president, return Crimea to Ukraine, Navalny infamously responded, “What, is Crimea a ham sandwich or something that you can take and give back? No, I don’t believe so.”)
Now Navalny has seemingly put the issue to bed. And in so doing, he has finally begun to address the core issue propelling the Russian devastation of Ukraine and the militarized dystopia Putin’s Russia has become: rote imperialism, predicated on conspiratorial resentment, unabashed revanchism, and neocolonial aspirations. After years of trying to shunt the topic of Russian imperialism to the side, Russian liberals appear finally to be waking to the reality that Russian colonialism and Russian chauvinism stand at the core of the country’s collapse into totalitarianism.
Indeed, Navalny further addressed the topic of Russian imperialism within his new series of “theses.” “Does Russia need new territories?” the jailed opposition figure asked. “Russia is a vast country with a shrinking population and dying-out rural areas. Imperialism and the urge to seize territory is the most harmful and destructive path.” This irredentism, as Russian liberals have begun to see, has resulted in unmitigated catastrophe. “Once again, the Russian government is destroying our future with its own hands just in order to make our country look bigger on the map,” Navalny continued. “But Russia is big enough as it is. Our objective should be preserving our people and developing what we have in abundance.”
Naturally, Navalny’s new stance against Russian imperialism is several years late and has only arrived now as a direct result of the Ukrainians’ bottomless bravery in the face of Putin’s monstrous imperial war machine. But there’s no need to look this gift horse in the mouth: This is a sign of a potential, nascent shift in Russian liberals’ awareness of the crimes of Russian colonialism—a first explicit step down the path to finally killing off the death-drive of Russian imperialism.
Navalny isn’t the only anti-Putin figure who’s recently begun addressing this topic. Last month in Politico, exiled Russian opposition figure Mikhail Khodorkovsky unveiled a similar vision for a post-Putin Russia, calling for the country to federalize fully—and potentially even allow nations colonized by Moscow, such as Chechnya, to finally achieve the independence they’ve long sought. To Khodorkovsky, a post-Putin Russia “must be decentralized—that is, united but divisible.”
This “united but divisible” framing is one that, if implemented, could go a significant way toward rectifying the ongoing social fractures left by Russian imperialism—and not just in Ukraine but in Russia itself. (As Russian journalist Alexey Kovalev recently wrote, “As one peels away the defunct layers of Russia’s imperial identity, sooner or later the question of imperialism within Russia’s own borders will come up.”) At a minimum, it is a recognition that the rot of Russian imperialism will continue to devastate Russia, as well as its neighbors, until it is finally expunged from the nation’s collective psyche. Taken in conjunction with Navalny’s new stance, it means that, perhaps for the first time in Russian history, the primary opponents of the Kremlin have finally begun placing Russian imperialism at the center of the country’s ills.
The problem for figures like Navalny and Khodorkovsky lies not in this recognition, however belated it may be, but in whether Russians are ready to hear what they have to say. Putin hardly operates in a vacuum, and there is little indication that the majority of Russians are opposed to his revanchism. Indeed, the single most popular moment of Putin’s presidency came when he initially launched his invasion of Ukraine, and when he seized his first Ukrainian province, in 2014. (There’s a reason Putin’s recent decade in power was built on this so-called “Crimean consensus.”) Even as his invasion turned sour over the past year, Russians have hardly evinced any significant opposition. At best, it remains a nation saturated in apathy—unwilling to face the legacies of Russian colonialism, let alone move against a regime dedicated to shattering Ukraine.
But with Navalny’s and Khodorkovsky’s recent shifts, prominent anti-Putin voices are at least willing to gesture at the imperialistic elephant in the room. And other voices have begun picking up the thread. “I think that Russian culture has a large imperial element, and the time has come to deal with it,” noted Russian sociologist Grigory Yudin said last week. “The collapse of an empire is a good moment to do that.”
Yudin is exactly right. And the good news is that this is a model we’ve seen play out successfully, time and again across the European continent, when listing European empires finally realized their best days of colonization were behind them. It’s a pattern we saw emerge in France after Algeria’s triumph, in the Netherlands after Indonesia’s anti-colonial victory, in Portugal after Angola and Mozambique secured their independence. Over and again, the shock of military defeat has ruptured the dreams of dying European empires—and set these former empires on a path toward eventual democratization.
In Ukraine, the pattern is playing out once more. And thanks to the sacrifice of Ukrainians, Russian liberals are realizing what’s long been evident: Putin’s imperialism, and any efforts at renewed empire, will only condemn Russia to repeat a centuries-long cycle of desolation and autocracy. As these anti-Putin figures may now be recognizing, the time has finally come to eject this irredentist streak from the Russian body politic—to forget Crimea, and to forget these dreams of empire, once and for all. HonorableTB fucked around with this message at 23:38 on Mar 6, 2023
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2023 23:32
|
|
- HonorableTB
- Dec 22, 2006
-
|
"Liberal" is to Jacobin is as to "Nazi" is to Putin.
Okay but that doesn't describe every other publication referring to him the same way, from the New Yorker to the NYT to Moscow Times to WaPo  whether or not you agree, he's considered the liberal opposition by more or less the entire media as well as western governments
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2023 23:40
|
|
- HonorableTB
- Dec 22, 2006
-
|
He's not particularly liberal is the thing, but a lot of people pin their hopes on him being one, because he's about the only left-wing opposition in the country with any sort of power. So you'll see people calling him liberal when he's really not. I was also just cautioning listening to Jacobin call someone liberal though, since it's just their swear-word.
Yeah this is a good point, Navalny's liberalness is extremely contextual and relational to Russian domestic politics. He's not a liberal by western political standards but by Russian political standards, he's the Least Bad of the serious politicians. There's weirdos like Yabloko and the communists (who are firmly Putin's instruments) but Navalny's the only one to actually do something about it, which is also why Putin kept trying to kill him and why he's currently in jail.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2023 23:51
|
|
- HonorableTB
- Dec 22, 2006
-
|
if i were vladimir putin i would simply stop the war
|
|
#
¿
Mar 7, 2023 00:14
|
|
- HonorableTB
- Dec 22, 2006
-
|
I'm gonna laugh my rear end off forever if they do the same trick again and sucker the Russians into moving all their poo poo from Bakhmut to Zaporizhzhia and Ukraine's counteroffensive ends up taking Severodonetsk and Lysychansk instead lmao
|
|
#
¿
Mar 7, 2023 04:30
|
|
- HonorableTB
- Dec 22, 2006
-
|
Gosh I feel awful for this lady, but like... what was she supposed to do, she looks like an average mom. If anyone feels good that she's suffering, well, I don't know what to tell you.
All this bullshit comes from the people in power (Putin and his cronies and supporters, who I assume are all crabs???), the rest of us plebes are just lambs to the slaughter
Putin is a crab reference: https://uproxx.com/viral/putin-crab-bald-dwarf-russian-online-censors/
shes a transplanted russian colonist, op. Here's more info:
https://kyivindependent.com/national/security-council-chief-russia-moved-600000-people-to-crimea-since-occupation
Kyiv Independent posted:
Security Council chief: Russia moved 600,000 people to Crimea since occupation
Over 600,000 Russians have moved to Crimea since the Kremlin illegally occupied the Ukrainian peninsula in 2014, according to National Security and Defense Council Secretary Oleksiy Danilov.
The relocations are part of a broader Russian effort to influence the region, Danilov said during an online conference on Dec. 15-16, according to a news report by Crimea.Realities, a project of Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty.
“Russia uses Crimea as a springboard,” Danilov said. “We see complete rearmament and constant military training there.”
The estimate reported by the secretary may be conservative. Russia may have moved up to 1 million people to Crimea by 2020, according to a Black Sea News report published in November 2020.
The population of the city of Sevastopol grew the fastest, increasing by 17% in 2018-2020, according to RFE/RL and Russian media. Sevastopol is where Russia’s Black Sea fleet is based. The port city had 450,000 residents in 2020. As of April this year, it added 64,000.
Some experts reportedly believe that Russia is trying to dilute the pre-existing population. Olga Skripnik, head of the Crimean Human Rights Group told RFE/RL that Russian military personnel loyal to Putin are being moved to permanent residence in Crimea with their families. She also accused the Kremlin of seizing local commercial assets and reallocating them to Russia’s representatives.
Native citizens complained to RFE/RL that newly arrived Russians get preferential treatment from local authorities. For instance, Russian doctors and teachers can get $13,600 in financial aid if they agree to work in rural areas for five years. Locals don’t get such an incentive.
Local citizens also complained that Moscow firms are recruiting people en masse to live and work in Crimea. Sevastopol-based restoration expert Anatoliy Tumanov told RFE/RL that he heard there may be an unofficial order not to hire locals.
The peninsula’s indigenous population, Crimean Tatars, have faced widespread persecution by Russian authorities. As of May, more than 150 Crimean Tatars were persecuted since 2014.
Activists believe that it’s Russia's revenge because of the Crimean Tatars’ pro-Ukrainian sentiments, as well as an attempt to change the peninsula’s demographics by pressuring those who are not loyal to the occupants to flee.
Keep in mind the above article is from 12/27/21, so pre-full scale invasion but definitely when it was obvious that Russia was going to invade.
Edit: Here's a great academic paper examining Russian colonization of Crimea during the 90s: https://ir.lib.uwo.ca/etd/7077/
University of Ontario posted:
Where does the myth that ‘Crimea has always been Russia’ come from? How did the Russian Empire and the Soviet Union ‘make’ Crimea Russian? This dissertation shows how the they applied settler colonial practices to Crimea, displacing the indigenous population and repopulating the peninsula with loyal settlers and how Crimean settler colonial structures survived the fall of the Soviet Union. It argues that this process defines post-Soviet history of the peninsula.
For centuries Crimean existed within the discourse of Russian imperial control. This dissertation challenges the dominant view by applying settler colonial theory to Crimea’s past and present for the first time. This produces two major scholarly contributions. Firstly, it broadens the geography of settler colonialism, demonstrating that it existed not only in Western European imperialism but also in Russia’s imperial project. Secondly, it challenges the ‘uniqueness’ of Russian imperialism.
The focus is on Crimea as a settler colony during the first years after the USSR’s collapse. The main argument is that the 1990s conflict in Crimea was mainly around decolonization attempts and resistance by the settler colonial system. Contrary to the analysis of ‘conflicts that did not happen’ it argues that Crimea is a case of a conflict that never stoppedsince the late 18th century. It analyses how settler colonial structures fought for their own preservation in opposition to the forces of decolonization represented by the Ukrainian and Crimean Tatar national movements, maneuvering between the Russian and Ukrainian capitals, which in turn triggered perceptions of Crimean separatism.
A main theme is control over the narrative. Crimean settler colonial institutions maintained their monopoly over ‘the truth’ about the peninsula’s past and present. This dissertation demonstrates how this continued in the 1990s, how Crimean newspapers forged the meaning of ‘Crimean,’ redesigned boundaries of inclusion and exclusion in order to marginalize Ukrainian and Crimean Tatar activists. Another important issue is the role of hybrid institutions including government structures in Crimea and the Black Sea Fleet, both which conducted subversive operations (informational and military) to counter and reduce the growing presence of the Ukrainian state on the peninsula.
Summary for Lay Audience
The annexation of Crimea by the Russian Federation in 2014 for many people was the first time they heard about the existence of this peninsula. A region in the Eastern Europe for most people of the West was too far away from their home to take the conflict around it seriously. Meanwhile, the claims of the Russian authorities that Crimea is ‘historically Russian’ for many seemed like a good enough justification for the annexation. As a result, the first territorial annexation in Europe since the Second World War received little to no active response from the world.
The purpose of this study is to demonstrate that the popular image of Crimea is a result of the Russian and Soviet imperial policies. I argue that since the late 18th century Crimea has been a settler colony of the Russian Empire, Soviet Union, and now – Russian Federation. In other words, the history of Crimea is similar to the history of other settler colonies of Western European empires. Therefore, the fact of settler colonization has to be at the basis of any analysis of Crimean past and present. Through the analysis of the political events in Crimea during the 1990s, this dissertation demonstrates that the fall of the Soviet Union did not bring decolonization to the peninsula. Quite the contrary, local institutions fought to preserve the colonial status quo and prolonged a conflict between the colonizers and the colonized. In that fight, Russian state, a former metropole, pretended to be a non-participant, but in fact actively interfered into Crimean domestic politics.
Edit 2: sorry sorry this was too much of an effortpost for gbs so have a meme
all my occupied territories, gone
HonorableTB fucked around with this message at 06:26 on Mar 7, 2023
|
|
#
¿
Mar 7, 2023 06:20
|
|
- HonorableTB
- Dec 22, 2006
-
|
Ah yes the headquarters city and garrison of the Black Sea Fleet, one of Russia's most important strategic interests in the entire world, voted to go Independent by 4.1% , and surely this has nothing at all to do with the abovementioned Black Sea Fleet base, which has been a strategic weakness of Russia's ever since they started leasing the base's land from Ukraine, or the 1.5 centuries of colonization since the Crimean War ended in 1856
I recommend interested parties to read this Center for Strategic & International Studies post about the strategic importance of Crimea to the Russian Federation:
https://www.csis.org/blogs/post-soviet-post/crimeas-strategic-value-russia
CSIS posted:
Russia’s takeover of Crimea has dramatically escalated the recent East-West struggle over Ukraine, converting an economic and diplomatic dispute into a major geopolitical crisis. Despite increasing Western condemnation and impending sanctions, Russia thus far shows no signs of yielding its control over Crimea. In fact, by agreeing to allow a referendum to be held on whether Crimea is to rejoin Russia, and then announcing Crimea’s annexation, Putin has allowed the crisis to escalate even further, although he has not yet completely foreclosed the possibility of eventual compromise. But Putin’s decision to occupy Crimea raises several questions, which are worthy of exploration. Why for example did Putin choose to act in Crimea? What does he hope to achieve? Most importantly, what is Crimea’s strategic value for Russia?
Military Benefits
Most importantly, control of Crimea gives Moscow continuing access to the naval base at Sevastopol, home to Russia’s Black Sea Fleet. Sevastopol’s warm water port, natural harbor and extensive infrastructure make it among the best naval bases in the Black Sea. While Russia’s current lease of Sevastopol runs through 2042, due to recent events Russia had become increasingly concerned that its future access might be compromised. Operating from Sevastopol, the Black Sea Fleet provides Russia with the ability to project power in and around the Black Sea, while also serving as a potent symbol of Russian power. True, the Black Sea Fleet is not currently much of a force, consisting of about forty aging vessels dating primarily from the 1970s, including two cruisers, several frigates, corvettes, mines warfare vessels, amphibious transport craft, and one submarine. However, Russia is in the process of upgrading the fleet, which is scheduled to receive six new submarines, six new frigates and a French-built Mistral helicopter carrier within the next few years.
Moreover, even as currently configured, the Black Sea Fleet provides Russia with substantial operational capability within the immediate area. In 2008, for example, Russia used the fleet to ferry troops and to conduct a blockade against Georgia. Sevastopol also provides the Russian Navy with access to the Mediterranean, and to the South Atlantic and Indian Oceans beyond, subject to certain limitations imposed by the Montreaux Convention on transit of warships through the Turkish Straits in time of war. It serves as headquarters for Russia’s newly constituted Mediterranean Task Force, which has recently resumed permanent operations in the Eastern Mediterranean, extending Russia’s reach and enhancing its prestige in the region. The Mediterranean Task Force was recently used to deliver military equipment to Syria, to remove Syrian chemical weapons and to conduct anti-piracy operations near Somalia.
Additionally, control of Crimea provides Russia with important strategic defense capabilities. While it may lack modern vessels, the Black Sea Fleet remains capable of addressing naval threats from other states in the region to Russian interests within the Black Sea. Its warships are well equipped with advanced supersonic anti-ship cruise missiles, air defense systems, and torpedoes. Crimea is also home to the BSF 11th Coastal Defense Missile Brigade, which uses the K-300P coastal defense system, armed with the very capable Yakhont anti-ship missile. Moreover, with long-term control assured, Russia is already upgrading Crimea’s air defense capabilities, and will eventually install an integrated air defense system likely based on Russia’s formidable S-400 area defense platform. Together with advanced combat aircraft stationed at Crimea’s Kacha and Gvardeisk air bases, this will significantly enhance Russia’s air defense capabilities on its southern flank.
Thorn in Ukraine’s Side
Important though they may be, securing the military benefits described above was probably not the only reason for Putin’s takeover of Crimea. Perhaps of equal importance was the need to regain influence over Ukraine’s future direction, which was diminishing rapidly following the removal of Yanukovich. By taking control of Crimea, Putin is likely seeking to make integration with Ukraine much less attractive for the West. He probably hopes that Crimea will serve as a symbol to encourage pro-Russian factions in Ukraine to support Russia and resist efforts by Kiev to achieve closer integration with the West. He also may well believe that the West will hesitate to incorporate Ukraine while it is deeply embroiled in a territorial dispute with Russia over Crimea. These are all elements of the playbook that Putin used in Georgia and elsewhere in the CIS to counter past efforts at NATO and EU expansion.
Should Putin’s strategy fail to achieve the outcomes that he desires, Crimea could well serve an additional strategic function, as a base of operations for future military action against Ukraine. By seizing Crimea, Russia is now able to threaten Ukraine on three fronts, from the northeast, the southeast and the south (Crimea). This has rendered the eastern half of Ukraine much less defensible. Should Ukrainian forces move too far to the east in an attempt to defend Ukraine’s sovereign territory, a military offensive from Crimea would threaten to cut off such troops from the rear. In addition, in the event of conflict, Crimea could serve as a base for conducting a naval blockade against Ukraine’s southern ports, and potentially for launching amphibious operations at selected coastal targets. Finally, Russian air power based in Crimea could operate deep inside of Ukraine to strike strategic targets, provide ground support for Russian forces and interdict Ukrainian troop movements.
Conclusion
Strategic decisions, it is said, are seldom based on a single factor. Certainly, Putin’s decision to seize Crimea was no exception. Assuming for the sake of argument that Putin was determined not to “lose” Ukraine to the West, as he apparently thought he would, he may well have thought that seizing Crimea offered him the best strategic return on his investment in comparison with other options. First of all, the immediate costs of seizing Crimea were relatively low. The actual operation was rapid, effective and bloodless because Russia already had troops on the ground in Crimea and the local populace was for the most part favorably disposed towards Russian intervention. Once seized, its relative geographic isolation meant that it would be relatively easy to defend against efforts to retake it. Moreover, the rewards were perceived to be quite significant. By seizing Crimea, Putin hoped to both preserve control over Sevastopol while maintaining his ability to shape events inside Ukraine.
Yet, indications are that Putin may have substantially underestimated the costs of his Crimean adventure, especially in the long run. At some point, Ukraine may well decide to ramp up pressure by restricting the supply of natural gas and water to Crimea. In the near term, Russia’s ability to make up the shortfall remains quite limited. In fact, Russia’s seizure of a gas plant in Ukrainian territory just outside of Crimea indicates the extent of Putin’s perceived vulnerability to such action. Moreover, the West has thus far been surprisingly unified in denouncing Russia’s actions in Crimea. US and EU officials have already imposed sanctions on specified Russian individuals, and have announced plans to impose ever-stronger sanctions over time should Russia continue to defy calls for withdrawal. Furthermore, Russia’s actions seem to have made the West more receptive, rather than less, in pursuing closer integration with Ukraine. Still, having taken this decisive step, Putin is not likely to give way easily without gaining at least some of his objectives in Ukraine.
This heavily informs what Russia will and won't do with regards to Crimea
HonorableTB fucked around with this message at 07:04 on Mar 7, 2023
|
|
#
¿
Mar 7, 2023 06:56
|
|
- HonorableTB
- Dec 22, 2006
-
|
Turtle Watch it would help if you understood the reason why there are so many Russians there in the first place. The referendums you keep citing are bullshit precisely because they were stacked in the first place because
Demographics of Crimea posted:
The upheavals and ethnic cleansing of the 20th century vastly changed Crimea's ethnic composition. In 1944, 200,000 Crimean Tatars were deported from Crimea to Central Asia and Siberia, along with 70,000 Greeks and 14,000 Bulgarians and other nationalities. By the latter 20th century, Russians and Ukrainians made up almost the entire population.
Let's take a look at those demo stats:
Do you see something that could possibly have affected the demographics of the people who would be voting in the referendums you continue citing, say between 1897 and 1959 when Ukrainian Tatars went from a combined 47.3% of the pop to Russians becoming 71.4% of the population in two generations, and still remains the majority ethnicity due to annexation at 67.9% as of 2014.
Almost as if they got rid of everyone who would be opposed to Ukrainian association  As if they..."Russified" it...
HonorableTB fucked around with this message at 08:07 on Mar 7, 2023
|
|
#
¿
Mar 7, 2023 08:04
|
|
- Adbot
-
ADBOT LOVES YOU
|
|
|
#
¿
May 14, 2024 14:25
|
|
- HonorableTB
- Dec 22, 2006
-
|
If you really want to get wild with Crimea, let's consider this:
According to the 2001 census, 77% of Crimean inhabitants named Russian as their native language, 11.4% – Crimean Tatar, and 10.1% – Ukrainian. Of the Ukrainians in Crimea, 40% gave Ukrainian as their native language, with 60% identifying as ethnic Ukrainians while giving Russian as their primary language.
The number of Crimean residents who consider Ukraine their motherland increased sharply from 32% to 71.3% from 2008 through 2011
How to square that with the referendum in Crimea? Simple:
It was made up to begin with, as all Russian elections are 
|
|
#
¿
Mar 7, 2023 08:10
|
|
#
¿
Mar 5, 2023 20:34
