Thing is, 2, 3 far right parties are really small with small support among people (and based on election). Another right party, Most (Bridge), didnt vote on training of UA soldiers in Croatia, they're all about giving support to Ukraine but not in that way, I think they're just afraid to say they're on Russia side in all this outright. Governing party, HDZ, is center right, similar to CDU in Germany, they're together in EPP, and they're completely in support for Ukraine.
Russian invasion of Ukraine | Fewer tweets, more discussion
- Thread starter Wednesday at Stoke
- Start date
Easy mistake to make (they both made it), but the town is called Bakhmut.
Their first mention of it is in October, for what it's worth.
Last edited:
https://m.faz.net/aktuell/politik/a...leopard-1-panzern-freigeben-18650618.amp.html
The delivery of Leopard 1 tanks now is in preparation, could be several dozens. However timeline and number is not yet clear as they are in long term storage at two companies and need to be refurbished first to become operational again. And there seems to be a big question mark regarding the ammunition - simply almost no one us still using the 105mm NATO caliber any more. Exception are the M-55 tanks Ukraine already got, but as I understood there is neither big stock nor anyone producing that type currently (this is not the same 105mm the French AMX-10 use, the French have shorter and weaker shells to fit into the smaller and lighter vehicle).
The delivery of Leopard 1 tanks now is in preparation, could be several dozens. However timeline and number is not yet clear as they are in long term storage at two companies and need to be refurbished first to become operational again. And there seems to be a big question mark regarding the ammunition - simply almost no one us still using the 105mm NATO caliber any more. Exception are the M-55 tanks Ukraine already got, but as I understood there is neither big stock nor anyone producing that type currently (this is not the same 105mm the French AMX-10 use, the French have shorter and weaker shells to fit into the smaller and lighter vehicle).
Not sure where he's getting this from, but he tends to be reliable. Russia regrouping for their "Major offensive" no doubt.
Or maybe they are preparing to retreat from all Ukraine?
Be ready for major bombardment of Ukraine on that date.
Usually Russia means surrendering and accepting Russia's conditions when they talk about peace talks. I don't expect anything else this time.
Exactly right. They lie so much and all the time that I don't understand how there's people in the West that believe what comes out of Lavrov's mouth
It’s not specified but I guess it’s being kept confidential on the Israel’s request. However, the suggested price is at around 1mEUR a piece.
Have some faith, they are going to retreat from Ukraine, disarm, pledge a $trillion in reparations, return all captured/kidnapped Ukrainians and surrender senior personnel for war crimes tribunals.
Maybe.
Because the West like anywhere has it's fair share of idiots.
Looks like we are at first talking about 29 units which FFG has already refurbished and could deliver soon - ammunition still being the big problem here.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...e?srnd=premium-europe&leadSource=uverify wall
Interesting talk. Just about launchers and missiles, but not about radars or control units.
If that really is the full scope I can only assume that this means adding the Swedish IRIS-T SL launchers as short range option to the medium range IRIS-T SLM systems, but not creating new air defense units. Which would make a lot of sense because that way the unmodified IRIS-T can be used, of which a lot of stock exists due to it being the default AA missile of the Eurofighter and the more expensive and rare bigger variant would only be used if really necessary.
Interesting talk. Just about launchers and missiles, but not about radars or control units.
If that really is the full scope I can only assume that this means adding the Swedish IRIS-T SL launchers as short range option to the medium range IRIS-T SLM systems, but not creating new air defense units. Which would make a lot of sense because that way the unmodified IRIS-T can be used, of which a lot of stock exists due to it being the default AA missile of the Eurofighter and the more expensive and rare bigger variant would only be used if really necessary.
OK, I may be utterly wrong here, but does anyone else think that the Russians have what they want currently? They have Crimea, plus the "land bridge" from Russia through Ukraine. Is it possible they just dig in, hold what they have and hope the West get bored?
It's been showed below, with posts from October and November. We're well into February and the discussion has moved to neighbour Vuhledar, which also isn't falling.
No, they aren't. If they were performing well the war would probably be over by now. They are also not only failing to gain territory right now, but have been failing to do so for months. In fact, after the first three weeks of the war they only had one net territory gain in already controlled Lugansk (the Popasna/Lyschansk/Severodonetsk area). On the meantime the UA regained the surroundings of Kharkiv, Yzium, Lyman, Kherson and the west bank of the Dnieper river.
No, it isn't, and you would have to bring reliable sources for that to make sense. Ukraine forces are regularly receiving NATO standard training and returning to the battlefront with that expertise (plus weaponry). Russian forces aren't. The key points of your argument of Russian gaining momentum are A) Bahkmut, where the forces are mercenaries that operate on their own or untrained/unequipped prisoners; and B) Numbers, which come from forces recruitment of untrained/unmotivated/undisciplined people who are then trained in the tradition of the Russian army (so very quickly, very poorly, and with corruption disrupting the process) and equipped with whatever is available (WW2 outfits in some reported cases). So no, they aren't about the same.
Now that we're on it, we should talk about your modus operandi of argument building. You're (albeit probably accidently) using one of the trademarks of the deceiver which is to hide the deceiving remark or "alternative fact" in between a group of reasonable, verifiable ones. So then we get statements like "Russian outnumbers Ukraine (truth), Ukraine needs more support (truth), the UA is as poorly equipped and trained as the RA (misleading), the UA is having as many casualties as the RA (deceiving), the war is going to be long (truth), Ukraine's allies must step up if they want to win (truth)". That, plus the constant repetition on those misleading remarks, makes for a very difficult and annoying reading (at least in my case).
On the war, I hope that past behaviour would be a good predictor of future behaviour, that the UA keeps getting the help it needs and keeps conducting secret and succesful operations, that the RA keeps making the mistakes that it had been making not only from the beginning of this invasion but from centuries of wars before, and that the spring will give us more information of what's what as (like most experts predicted) the winter has been mostly a stalemate.
No. If that would be the case they would dig in and not try to attack even more
As someone who doesn't follow it minute-to-minute, the map seems fairly static to me.
Some political commentators agree, suggesting Russia just want to straighten out the borders of the land they’ve taken so it looks more legitimate, dig in their defences and then they’ll claim the current operation was a success.
That is probably their gameplan right now. Thing is, they need to legalize their conquests in order to get rid of the sanctions, and Ukraine isn't going to settle for the current scenario. So they would need a significant change of heart in the West in order to get rid of the sanctions and get back to "normal". And time would cost them money and people.
Last edited:
I think militarily, this is probably all they're capable of, I just don't see how Putin can spin it politically. He entered them into this conflict with very grandiose claims, and now all they have to show for it is, I think, 15% of Ukrainian territory.
You are right. But it's static because currently Russia's attacks are all repelled and the Ukrainian try very little at the moment, possibly because they are to busy defending.
Territorially, perhaps. But more than anything, what they wanted was regime change and to be able to have decisive political power in their sphere of influence. Not only have they not got that, but if Ukraine doesn't get a peace they can be happy with, they might get a angry ill disposed neighbor armed to the teeth next to them.
even if Russia settled for this,
Even if the west got bored and legitimised this approach,
Ukraine wouldn’t stop fighting either, they just wouldn’t be able to keep the areas safe.
Cheers, lads. Appreciate the replies.
You also have to bear in mind that Ukraine are well past the point of return in terms of settling for anything less than reclaiming all of their land. The sanctions on Putin also wouldn't go away if there was a peace agreement since he would still be sitting on stolen land. This conflict will continue until one of the two sides is vanquished.
Using the SLS missiles in order to save the SLM's makes a lot of sense since they are mostly used against low flying targets where it's usually radar coverage that is the limiting factor, not missile range.
What he actually means is the preservation of his own regime and life.
Whatever i need is not of your concern. Ill post is as much times i feel like
Thanks
Last edited:
Norway has officially ordered 54 new Leopard 2A7 to replace our old 36 (operational) Leopard 2A4. It probably won't really affect deliveries of equipment to Ukraine, at least not in the short to medium term, but it's very likely that it was itself affected by the war. For a while now there were basically two candidates, the Leopard 2A7 or the South Korean K2 Black Panther, and more recently the discussion turned to whether or not we even needed to buy new tanks at all, or perhaps spend it on other equipment. Seems likely that the war pushed the debate in the favour of getting the new tanks, and more specifically getting the Leopards that all of our close neighbours use.
We were actually supposed to order 18 more, and still might, but I reckon that's going to be sort of the compromise. We'll probably spend the money on artillery and/or anti-air systems.
We were actually supposed to order 18 more, and still might, but I reckon that's going to be sort of the compromise. We'll probably spend the money on artillery and/or anti-air systems.
The manufacturer is going to make zillions during and after this war for a long time. Tip for investing
Apparently, these will arrive in the spring together with new HIMARs launchers programmed which will accommodate for these bombs. However, Ukraine still needs long-range ACATMS missiles for deterrence purposes, based on symmetrical warfare principles. Only long-range capabilities will make Russia think about conducting these massive strikes on civilians in the rear.
The pros and cons of killing Zelenskyy
In ice hockey, we often say that you should not start something that can't finish. In other words, you better be ready to anwser the bell (i.e. drop the gloves and fight) once you throw a dirty hit because you will be regarded as a dirty pussy if you don't.
The point of that hockey reference? If those Russians approve of targeting a Head of State, then they better understand that Putin becomes a target as well.
Is there a way to message the Wankgner group directly and call them cnuts,?