Would people here think it would be counter productive if Ukraine covert forces blew up electricity grids? Im just thinking its not the same as blowing up Russian supermarkets full of civilians, but i just feel that Russians in Moscow need to feel they are actually at war and that their quality of life has to take a hit.
Russian invasion of Ukraine | Fewer tweets, more discussion
- Thread starter Wednesday at Stoke
- Start date
I think that would be counter-productive, for reasons I quote from my previous post.
Yeah i would say counter-productive, legitimizing Russia's war against the "terrorists from Ukraine". Also, i would assume Moscow and the bigger citys in general are more anti-war than the rest of Russia, but im not sure.
Russia should remain isolated pariah state until the citizens start asking themselves why no one wants to trade with them, why they don't have access to this and that, why Russian economy is sinking. Hopefully the question leads them back to Putin.
Yeah, it’s probably going to put Russians (even more) against Ukraine rather than make them question the idea of this war. I mean, if mobilization didn’t do it…
And the rest of the world would most likely be less eager to help if Ukraine was going to attack civilian infrastructure like Russia does.
I just saw the specific machine gun model the Ukrainians are using in the video. If the sound of that thing was enough to scare grandfathers or great-grandfathers in their younger days, how stupid can Prizhogyn and the military brass be to hope for success through human waves against a number of those?
For those who don't get that reference: We see a German MG3, which is based on the MG42 used in WW2 (the famous "Hitler's buzzsaw")
Has there been any talk on how Ukraine are going to cope with the cost of all of the assistance in weapons and equipment?
Surely the US etc are not doing this for free?
Plus the cost of rebuilding the country's destroyed areas will be massive.
Surely the US etc are not doing this for free?
Plus the cost of rebuilding the country's destroyed areas will be massive.
They have an abundance of resources in Ukraine which is why Russia wants it in the first place.
So far almost all weaponry has been either directly donated or was bought by Ukraine, but refinanced by funds from the EU or US. Some small stuff was likely directly bought by Ukraine (think of all the COTS drones they repurposed for dropping grenades etc), possibly also ammunition and small weapons, especially if it came from countries who are not really supporting Ukraine (think of Iranian artillery ammo that somehow appeared in Ukraine possession), but that isn't the biggest share of the costs for the war. The financial part of the actual war is so far pretty straightforward - Ukraine fight, the West provides weapons to do that. It is much more a political or military decision what is provided than a financial question.
Rebuilding the country and covering the ongoing costs due to the destruction, loss of workers due to having to fight or having left the country etc is a different and more complicated topic and one area where Ukraine definitely will struggle, unless a massive programme will be created, similar to the Marshall plan after WW2.
Always with that right hand gripping something
Cheers. The level of destruction might require something like the Marshall plan. The threat of Russia doing this all over again might make it very complicated
For comparison, the UK only finished paying its WW2 debt to the US on 31 December 2006. Most the Russian debt was written off because of the cold war basically, they were never going to pay it.
In this instance, the US and others sending aid aren't doing it just for the benefit of Ukraine, its for their own benefit and security also. Leaving Ukraine with crippling debt leaving them weak and vulnerable is not an option. The US won't burden them with that, even from a completely selfish point of view.
Russians killing those who refuse...
https://edition.cnn.com/2023/02/12/europe/wagner-convicts-eastern-ukraine-pleitgen-intl/index.html
Exactly right. The West will benefit hugely from a weakened or even defeated Russia. Especially if it leads to the end of Putin in whatever way or form that may be. It's also of huge benefit with regards to seeing how our equipment works in places like this and also the Intel gained from seeing the Russian forces in action.
I'm absolutely certain that most of the world thought Russia had a far bigger, more capable and modern military.
Ultimately the US, UK and rest of Europe want peace in the region. They want Ukraine back whole, and they want a Russia they can work and trade with. From what I've seen and read, a large percentage of Russians want a fairer democracy too.
I think it's only Russia (Putin) that have a different goal. You can absolutely guarantee if Russia did retake Ukraine, or huge areas of it, then they (he) wouldn't stop there. He's made it more than clear countless times, hence aiding Ukraine to weaken or even defeat him is absolutely the best option for everyone. It's only the Republicans that seem to have an issue with that, and I'm certain that's because most of them are in Putin's pocket or have shady large campaign donations from Russia.
Ignore the awful music but this it is pretty insane footage from few days ago:
I think all the aid coming from the US has been paid for (or at least guaranteed) by the US federal government...
Regarding Europe, a big part of the weapons coming from different EU countries in the 2022 was paid for by the EU (from the EPF and other items in the EU budget)... Some countries even gifted their weapons without systematically asking for compensation from EU's funds (Germany and even Baltic countries -not the richest- did this repeatedly have I heard).
Some heavy weapons will however be sold by big firms to Ukraine directly. Those weapon manufacturers are no heroes. They want their money (and they also need it to boost production or keep it up), and they will get paid by loans guaranteed by the EU. Which means the EU will pay them if Ukraine can't pay in time (Orban has been trying to block this, but most spending within the budget can be done with qualified majority, no need for unanimity).
No mine flails in 2023.
A single T-90 tank would cost $4.5 million USD accoding to most recent estimates. That's a lot of money going down the drain.
Are they drunk?
A plausible scenario
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-64596363
Ukraine war: Russians slowly take ground around Bakhmut
Ukrainian troops are doggedly holding onto Bakhmut amid fierce Russian attacks
By Orla Guerin
BBC News, Bakhmut
Ukraine war: Russians slowly take ground around Bakhmut
Ukrainian troops are doggedly holding onto Bakhmut amid fierce Russian attacks
By Orla Guerin
BBC News, Bakhmut
I believe the US advised Ukraine recently to retreat from Bakhmut and relocate their forces to elsewhere.
They’re too busy using those as mine detectors.
The 'headline' reads much more positive than the actual quotes. Some of these politicians seem to be even more extreme than Putin. They are rather like "let's escalate the nuclear deterrence to prevent further weapon deliveries to Ukraine" than "this madness needs to stop".
To be expected.
There are no actual adversaries of Putin in the Russian political establishment. It's a puppet show. His actual political adversaries are in prison and their voices are banned from mainstream media. All those politicians are in the payroll of the Kremlin, to offer different voices to the masses but only strictly within the limits the Kremlin allows. Their show would come to an end with Putin's downfall. So of course they are advocating for continuous escalation as well. It's self preservation of the establishment.
Advocating for withdrawal from Ukraine is not something you'll hear from any politician in Russia. Criticising some tactics of the "SMO" is allowed, but being against it altogether is not acceptable to the Kremlin. So the politicians will either stay quiet or they will shout for more escalation. Those are the only avenues to them within the confines of the system.
Last edited:
Yeah, but at least to me the opening tweet of that Twitter thread read a little bit as if they were turning on Putin/increasing the pressure on him/openly challenging him
You have to remember this is propaganda and not just for the Russian people. It’s being exported to the west and designed to give Russia the same level of crazy dangerous that North Korea enjoy.
Watch this.
@harms interested in your opinion on this.
I am reading his first book now and I have to say, I feel like there's no light at all where Russia is concerned.
I'm no historian or anything, but I read an article in a Danish paper with a historian saying that it looked like Russia were trying to win in the east of Ukraine by doing what they did in Belarus against Germany in WW2 during Operation Bagration. Basically attacking in a lot of different places such that the opponent don't know where exactly to reinforce. I'm thinking it's difficult to do that in this day and age and be successful when satellites will tell us where the next big offensive is coming though.
Knowing where the next offensive is coming is helpful but doesn't help that much if you are unable to mobilise sufficiently to repel it.
The memoirs - "Nothing is True and Everything is Possible: Adventures in Modern Russia"