Russian invasion of Ukraine | Fewer tweets, more discussion

[harms]

Republicans doing what they are paid to do, Ukraine aid was never going to pass.

From what I've read they're using it to negotiate for their own anti-immigration bill? I've seen opinions that it's not as bad as it sounds as the Ukrainian aid is going to pass eventually (after Republicans get what they need internally). Although any delay isn't welcome, of course.

 

[Simbo]

From what I've read they're using it to negotiate for their own anti-immigration bill? I've seen opinions that it's not as bad as it sounds as the Ukrainian aid is going to pass eventually (after Republicans get what they need internally). Although any delay isn't welcome, of course.

That's my take on it as well. Short of Trump getting in and leaving NATO, there really isn't much choice in aiding Ukraine.

 

[Raoul]

Surely there'll be further talks on Ukraine aid won't there?

It’s an ongoing negotiation, so yes.

 

[VorZakone]

 

[Raoul]

From what I've read they're using it to negotiate for their own anti-immigration bill? I've seen opinions that it's not as bad as it sounds as the Ukrainian aid is going to pass eventually (after Republicans get what they need internally). Although any delay isn't welcome, of course.

Yes, that’s precisely what is happening. Ukraine aid is being deliberately combined with Israel aid, so barring something extraordinary, it is likely to eventually pass. Biden has intentionally included a very large sum for Ukraine.

 

[Simbo]

Yes, that’s precisely what is happening. Ukraine aid is being deliberately combined with Israel aid, so barring something extraordinary, it is likely to eventually pass. Biden has intentionally included a very large sum for Ukraine.

Putin will be doing everything possible to cultivate wars around the world, its so very beneficial for him. He really is the most dangerous man alive.

 

[Mihai]

Ukraine has disappeared off the UK TV media in favour of the Israeli Palestinian conflict. Putin, who has been charged with War Crimes, is in the UAE where he's been given the red carpet treatment. That will piss off the Yanks and may help the Bill on Ukraine Aid to pass. Issue is the money. Their national debt is approaching $34 trillion. That's money owed to Bond holders and other types of securities. They could just issue more bonds to raise the money but that isn't the issue. More and more governments at looking inward to support their own people(except the UK who support anyone that tips up on the Kent coast) and it's a political argument rather than a fiscal one I believe. If the USA stop supporting Ukraine, well they are in deep trouble. Puitin must be laughing his socks off.

UK is supporting Rwanda's politicians.

 

[VorZakone]

Under Putin, the uber-wealthy Russians known as ‘oligarchs’ are still rich but far less powerful

Analyst Nikolai Petrov of Britain’s Royal Institute of International Affairs wrote that Russia is engaged in deprivatization “intended to redistribute wealth to a new generation of less-powerful individuals and shore up the president’s own position.”

“A new group of quasi-owner state oligarchs is being created, with wealth and control redistributed from the ‘old nobles’ to the new,” he said.

https://apnews.com/article/russia-putin-oligarchs-rich-ukraine-war-9b167bb98ed050c5fbfadf0b069a0b8c

 

[The United]

I don't have a particular answer for that. Ukrainians have said that Wagner was a tougher opponent than Russian regular forces. And now Wagner has been pretty much disbanded by Putin.

Wagner was only there for that city, as I have been pointing out since months ago, and even the baldie confirmed it and did withdraw from the city.

 

[The United]

On the Bakhmut debate...

That does not say anything though. I mean UKR did lose the city and still can not retake it. The main point of debate is that if it was worth for UKR to lose some of its best troop against Wagner prisoners who always had plan to leave the city once taken it and the time that it probably gave the RU to prepare their Southern front.

The result probably says no, it did not seem to worth it for UKR. There is nothing much to argue. It is not like UKR held the city. They did NOT.

 

[VorZakone]

That does not say anything though. I mean UKR did lose the city and still can not retake it. The main point of debate is that if it was worth for UKR to lose some of its best troop against Wagner prisoners who always had plan to leave the city once taken it vs the time that it probably gave the RU to prepare their Southern front.

The result probably says no, it did not seem to worth it for UKR. There is nothing much to argue. It is not like UKR held the city. They did NOT.

To be replaced by the Russian regular army?

 

[The United]

To be replaced by the Russian regular army?

Yes. So basically, RU's normal/special troops did not have to exhaust themselves to get the city while the opposite happened to UKR. UKR didn't even get to destroy much of RU regular troops there. Wagner losing their prisoners did not have much effect on RU's regular force capacity and UKR would not meet them again, meaning killing them as many as they did made little difference for the war as Wagner was just like a different entity.

 

[VorZakone]

Yes. So basically, RU's normal/special troops did not have to exhaust themselves to get the city while the opposite happened to UKR. UKR didn't even get to destroy much of RU regular troops there. Wagner losing their prisoners did not have much effect on RU's regular force capacity and UKR would not meet them again, meaning killing them as many as they did made little difference for the war as Wagner was just like a different entity.

I'm not sure to what extent it matters. Whether they had to face Wagner convicts or Russian regulars, the Ukrainian explanation is that Bakhmut was important for them to defend for territorial reasons according to that WaPo article. They failed to hold Bakhmut but that was their rationale.

Also, if not at Bakhmut, what guarantees are there that Ukraine wouldn't have had to face these prisoners somewhere else? The Ukrainians themselves know that the trade-off was horrible and that they were losing good men in a fight against convicts that Russia couldn't care less about. But is that an argument to avoid all areas where Russia deploys the prisoners?

 

[Morty_]

That does not say anything though. I mean UKR did lose the city and still can not retake it. The main point of debate is that if it was worth for UKR to lose some of its best troop against Wagner prisoners who always had plan to leave the city once taken it and the time that it probably gave the RU to prepare their Southern front.

The result probably says no, it did not seem to worth it for UKR. There is nothing much to argue. It is not like UKR held the city. They did NOT.

Bakhmut isn't even strategically important, so there is no reason to panic over not taking it back.

What is important, however, is Russia paying of US politicians, so no further aid will come, Europe is on its own now, and they don't care enough to increase production to even match Russia.

2024 is going to be a really depressing year, by the looks of thing.

 

[The United]

I'm not sure to what extent it matters. Whether they had to face Wagner convicts or Russian regulars, the Ukrainian explanation is that Bakhmut was important for them to defend for territorial reasons according to that WaPo article. They failed to hold Bakhmut but that was their rationale.

Also, if not at Bakhmut, what guarantees are there that Ukraine wouldn't have had to face these prisoners somewhere else? The Ukrainians themselves know that the trade-off was horrible and that they were losing good men in a fight against convicts that Russia couldn't care less about. But is that an argument to avoid all areas where Russia deploys the prisoners?

There are no guarantees in war. That's why I said my argument was based on hindsight, even though many military experts were raising concerns during the battle of the city. But it is a fact that Wagner was going to leave the city. The UKR explaining is fine for themselves. But the price they may have paid for it may not have been worth it, and whatever is happening now is probably the consequence of it.

The argument was that UKR should have left the city early while diverting some of its resources to push on the southern front early to unsettle the RU defense there. Now, I know you would ask what about the RU march from Bakhmut. Well, are they doing now? How did UKR contain them around the city before and now? That's what they should have done early to avoid losing many men against prisoners who will have left and little impact on the war overall.

 

[The United]

Bakhmut isn't even strategically important, so there is no reason to panic over not taking it back.

What is important, however, is Russia paying of US politicians, so no further aid will come, Europe is on its own now, and they don't care enough to increase production to even match Russia.

2024 is going to be a really depressing year, by the looks of thing.

See the above post. What you said about the city not important for strategically is true, it made even less sense that they spent so much time and resources to defend it. The poster that I am replying to said UKR thought it was.

I think some posters are really not getting my argument on how defending that city for that long with so many losses may have affected their success (or failure) on their southern offensive.

 

[VorZakone]

There are no guarantees in war. That's why I said my argument was based on hindsight, even though many military experts were raising concerns during the battle of the city. But it is a fact that Wagner was going to leave the city. The UKR explaining is fine for themselves. But the price they may have paid for it may not have been worth it, and whatever is happening now is probably the consequence of it.

The argument was that UKR should have left the city early while diverting some of its resources to push on the southern front early to unsettle the RU defense there. Now, I know you would ask what about the RU march from Bakhmut. Well, what are they doing now? How did UKR contain them around the city before and now? That's what they should have done early to avoid losing many men against prisoners who will have little impact on the war overall.

And if Russia deploys those prisoners in the south as the first line of defense for Ukraine to waste its men & equipment on them?

I know these are counter-factuals and I don't have the expertise to judge Ukraine's rationale for Bakhmut. I just find your "the prisoners have little impact" argument not convincing. It seems to me those prisoners were going to be used anyway whether at Bakhmut or somewhere else.

 

[The United]

And if Russia deploys those prisoners in the south as the first line of defense for Ukraine to waste its men & equipment on them?

I know these are counter-factuals and I don't have the expertise to judge Ukraine's rationale for Bakhmut. I just find your "the prisoners have little impact" argument not convincing. It seems to me those prisoners were going to be used anyway whether at Bakhmut or somewhere else.

Let me clarify it again. The "prisoners" that were attacking the city were under the Wagner group. They were only there to take the city to enhance their 'brand' to show off against RU DOD, then they would leave. And it exactly happened. UKR was reportedly contacted by the baldie to trade the secrets of DOD's troops for giving him that city.

If RU's military deployed their prisoners somewhere, killing them is good because they are under RU's military, which means they wasted their manpower.

Wagner may not have faced UKR anywhere else after that city. So killing them did not help UKR much. Instead, it helps the RU regular army in the sense that they did not have to lose many to take the city while giving them enough time to dig in more on the south. All that happened while UKR was losing some of its best troops and equipment for that city.

Wagner may have helped the RU military if the RU military got beaten badly and the UKR was becoming a threat to the RU homeland even if the baldie was still alive, I would presume. But we know that would not happen for now. Even when RU Military was having a difficult time in the summer last year, did we see Wagner show up to help them?

No, because Wagner at that time, or even right now, is a different entity. UKR's main focus is to inflict as much as damage to the RU military because they are the main force that they would be and have been facing to win this war.

And sidenote about the conflict between Wagner and RU DOD actually helped Putin because now he totally controlled that group. If the baldie was still alive, he would try as much as possible to stay out of RU DOD's control aka Putin's, meaning Wagner group involvement would have almost guaranteed to be minimal with UKR after that city.

 

[VorZakone]

Let me clarify it again. The "prisoners" that were attacking the city were under the Wagner group. They were only there to take the city to enhance their 'brand' to show off against RU DOD, then they would leave. And it exactly happened.

If RU's military deployed their prisoners somewhere, killing them is good because they are under RU's military, which means they wasted their manpower.

Wagner may not have faced UKR anywhere else after that city. So killing them did not help UKR much. Instead, it helps the RU regular army in the sense that they did not have to lose many to take the city while giving them enough time to dig in more on the south. All that happened while UKR was losing some of its best troops and equipment for that city.

Wagner may have helped the RU military if the RU military got beaten badly and the UKR was becoming a threat to the RU homeland even when the baldie was still alive. But we know that would not happen for now. Even when RU Military was having a difficult time in the summer last year, did we see Wagner show up to help them?

No, because Wagner at that time, or even right now, is a different entity. UKR's main focus is to inflict as much as damage to the RU military because that is what they are facing before, now and in the future.

Wagner was already present in Ukraine before Bakhmut: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Popasna

And Russia is using prisoners now, without the Wagner umbrella. Again, what is the argument here? Ukraine should avoid every area where Russia deploys prisoners?
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-67175566

 

[The United]

Wagner was already present in Ukraine before Bakhmut: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Popasna

And Russia is using prisoners now, without the Wagner umbrella. Again, what is the argument here? Ukraine should avoid every area where Russia deploys prisoners?
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-67175566

For the last time, UKR should have avoided fighting Wagner's prisoners in that city because they were not coming back to another battle (most likely). I did add some more info on my previous post. If you still don't get what I wanted to say, I agree to disagree.

 

[VorZakone]

Well, I give up. I did add some more info on my previous post. If you still don't get what I wanted to say, I agree to disagree.

But what is your central argument? Whether it's prisoners or professional soldiers from Wagner or the Russian MoD, the fact is there is an enemy on Ukraine's territory that Ukraine has to deal with.

 

[VorZakone]

And Russia continues to use mercenary-like groups anyway: https://www.kyivpost.com/post/23007

Ukraine doesn't exactly have the luxury here to choose whom they fight. Russia will use everything they have to throw at Ukraine. That doesn't absolve Ukrainian general command from its blunders or mistakes, but this is the enemy they're facing. An enemy that will continue to throw cannon fodder at Ukraine while Ukraine loses its best.

 

[The United]

And Russia continues to use mercenary-like groups anyway: https://www.kyivpost.com/post/23007

Ukraine doesn't exactly have the luxury here to choose whom they fight. Russia will use everything they have to throw at Ukraine. That doesn't absolve Ukrainian general command from its blunders or mistakes, but this is the enemy they're facing. An enemy that will continue to throw cannon fodder at Ukraine while Ukraine loses its best.

To certain extend, they do. In fact that's necessary to win the war. Not every battle has to be won, especially in this situation.

 

[VorZakone]

To certain extend, they do. In fact that's necessary to win the war. Not every battle has to be won, especially in this situation.

Now you're saying something else. If Bakhmut as a city in itself had no strategic value, that's a fine discussion to have and many had been saying exactly that.

But you can't seem to give me a satisfying answer on how Ukraine can avoid fighting prisoners. Whether it's Bakhmut, whether it's in the south, whether it's the Russian MoD recruiting them or Wagner-like groups.

 

[The United]

Now you're saying something else. If Bakhmut as a city in itself had no strategic value, that's a fine discussion to have and many had been saying exactly that.

But you can't seem to give me a satisfying answer on how Ukraine can avoid fighting prisoners. Whether it's Bakhmut, whether it's in the south, whether it's the Russian MoD recruiting them or Wagner-like groups.

My central argument, if you went back a few days, was that UKR wasted a lot of manpower, equipment, and time fighting those Wagner's prisoners and achieved nothing for that city. If they hadn't done it for as long as they did, they probably could have diverted some of their resources to the southern front early, which may have given them a better chance to succeed there later on. How would they divert some of their resources? By not getting killed by the Wagner's prisoners in the city because they would be leaving and would not fight UKR again anywhere else (most likely). This is based on my thinking that RU had tons of time to dig in the south and UKR was exhausted even with their newly trained force when they started the counterattack, which massively contributed to their situation overall right now in the south.

If you kept asking me how they could have avoided fighting the Wagner's prisoners in that city. I would say just leave it and prepare their defense outside or near the city. Or even counterattack to contain their regular troops that would come to replace the Wagner prisoners later, which is what the UKR is doing now. I mean, if you can't satisfy that answer, that may be good, because otherwise, I should have been the head of UKR forces.

 

[VorZakone]

My central argument if you went back a few days was that UKR wasted a lot of manpower/equipment/time fighting those Wagner's prisoners and achieved NOTHING. If they didn't do it for as long as they did, they probably could have diverted some of their resources to the Southern front early which may have given them a better chance to succeed there.

And that's a valid question (on preserving resources for the southern offensive). But your posts kept switching between that argument and "prisoners have little impact". I disagree with the latter argument.

 

[The United]

And that's a valid question (on preserving resources for the southern offensive). But your posts kept switching between that argument and "prisoners have little impact". I disagree with the latter argument.

Because my central argument is also based on the fact that the UKR wasted a lot of their resources on the Wagner's prisoners, whom they would not fight again later. If they were doing it against the RU's regular forces or even the prisoners under them, it would be much more beneficial to them because the RU's regular forces would be equally exhausted, but they were not, and it gave them a massive advantage to fight the exhausted UKR troops in the later battles.

 

[VorZakone]

Because my central argument is also based on the fact that UKR wasted a lot of their resources on the Wagner's prisoners who they would not fight again later. If they were doing it against RU's regular forces or even the prisoner under them, the RU's regular forces would be equally exhausted but they were not and it gave them massive advantage to fight the exhausted UKR troops in the later battles.

What does it matter whether the prisoners serve under Wagner or the Russian MoD? It's cannon fodder nevertheless.

 

[The United]

What does it matter whether the prisoners serve under Wagner or the Russian MoD? It's cannon fodder nevertheless. And what makes you believe Russia wouldn't use Wagners prisoners?

Scenario one: The city fell quickly, and the baldie left the city for the regular troops. He may not have to talk sh*t about RU DOD and, therefore, is alive. He said he would stay out of the city, and he probably would. Which probably means UKR won't have to face Wagner's prisoners again.

Scenario two: The city didn't fall easily. Shit stirred between RU DOD and the baldie due to that. The rest is history, and now RU DOD has absorbed the prisoners from Wagner, and they may use them later or already now.

Obviously, here I am talking about scenario one being preferred. But scenario two did happen.

What made me sure of anything that will happen? Nothing. I am trying to analyze what has happened.

 

[VorZakone]

Scenario one: The city fell quickly, and the baldie left the city for the regular troops. He may not have to talk sh*t about RU DOD and, therefore, is alive. He said he would stay out of the city, and he probably would. Which probably means UKR won't have to face Wagner's prisoners again.

Scenario two: The city didn't fall easily. Shit stirred between RU DOD and the baldie due to that. The rest is history, and now RU DOD has absorbed the prisoners from Wagner, and they may use them later or already now.

Obviously, here I am talking about scenario one being preferred. But scenario two did happen.

What made me sure of anything that will happen? Nothing. I am trying to analyze what has happened.

Let's say Ukraine withdraws from Bakhmut much earlier. Wagner leaves. Russia absorbs the prisoners and deploys them in the south instead. What exactly changes here in this scenario? In this scenario Ukraine still has to fight prisoners and they will still lose good soldiers against these prisoners.

Or is it your belief that Ukraine wouldn't have had to fight prisoners somewhere else than Bakhmut if they withdrew earlier from Bakhmut?

 

[VorZakone]

Russia luring migrants from Finnish border for war in Ukraine

Russia is trying to recruit foreign migrants, detained in a recent sweep at its border with Finland, for its war in Ukraine.

The BBC has seen evidence of several cases in which foreigners were rushed into a military camp on the border with Ukraine, days after they were picked up for breaching immigration laws. The practice of coercing people in pre-deportation detention centres to sign contracts for army service in Ukraine is not new, but the numbers swelled as foreign migrants arrived at Russia's 1,340-km (833-mile) border with Finland.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-67647379

 

[The United]

Let's say Ukraine withdraws from Bakhmut much earlier. Wagner leaves. Russia absorbs the prisoners and deploys them in the south instead. What exactly changes here in this scenario? In this scenario Ukraine still has to fight prisoners and they will still lose good soldiers against these prisoners.

Or is it your belief that Ukraine wouldn't have had to fight prisoners somewhere else than Bakhmut if they withdrew earlier from Bakhmut?

My question back to you is, what made you sure that RU's DoD would absorb them from the Wagner group if scenario one happened? The baldie did not want to go under DoD at all, and the scenario would give him a chance to stay away from DoD.

Remember, we are talking about Wagner's prisoners. They were promised that they would be released after, like, six months (?) of combat. The only reason DoD was able to absorb some of them is because scenario two happened. And Putin issued a ban, saying that no prisoners could be recruited anymore or something. Not that I believed them, but just to make a point here regarding mass prisoner recruitment.

 

[VorZakone]

My question back to you is, what made you sure that RU's DoD would absorb them from the Wagner group if scenario one happened? The baldie did not want to go under DoD at all, and the scenario would give him a chance to stay away from DoD.

Remember, we are talking about Wagner's prisoners. They were promised that they would be released after, like, six months (?) of combat. The only reason DoD was able to absorb some of them is because scenario two happened.

I'm getting the impression that you are overly fixated on Wagner. What does it matter in the grand scheme of things whether prisoners are recruited by Wagner or the Russian MoD? How does it change the total manpower that Ukraine has to fight against?

Forget Wagner. We know the Russians are recruiting prisoners now. There is no escaping these prisoners on the battlefield as far as I can tell. And Ukrainians will continue to lose good soldiers against these prisoners.

 

[VorZakone]

 

[VorZakone]

 

[VorZakone]

 

[Raoul]

Orban appears to be claiming Ukraine is very corrupt as a reason why they shouldn't be supported.

https://www.politico.eu/article/hungary-orban-corruption-transparency-international/

 

[Morty_]

Its the party of treason, after all, so no surprise there.

Zelensky going to visit the US soon, these people are going to lie straight to his face, assuring him that aid is on its way, with their fingers crossed behind their backs.

 

[Simbo]

That does not say anything though. I mean UKR did lose the city and still can not retake it. The main point of debate is that if it was worth for UKR to lose some of its best troop against Wagner prisoners who always had plan to leave the city once taken it and the time that it probably gave the RU to prepare their Southern front.

The result probably says no, it did not seem to worth it for UKR. There is nothing much to argue. It is not like UKR held the city. They did NOT.

if I remember correctly, Ukraine pretty much destroyed Wagner. The events at Bakhmut resulted in a coup attempt and the assassination of the Wagner leadership. An event sitting on the minds of many Russians I’m sure.

That’s before you get into the destruction wrought on Russian armed forces. Of course the battles fought there were worth it.

 

[Gehrman]

How pathetic when the powerful west cannot at least consistently send aid to a prevent the 2nd largest country being annexed by Russisa.