Russian invasion of Ukraine | Fewer tweets, more discussion

This is still an exception in the sense that it is more of a CT/black ops type off activities, rather than sniping in a conventional conflict that is currently taking place in Ukraine.

I think you are thinking of a marksman. And yeah, in a high tempo fight like Ukraine a sniper might work more like marksmen. Traditionally though snipers are more like special ops working to their own objectives away from the main battle.
 
The Daily Mirror reports that:

"... the highly-respected head of the Russian Central Bank bank boss has quit ... The former economic adviser to the Kremlin leader told reportedly told Putin that his invasion of Ukraine has plunged the Russian economy into a “sewer”

... She reportedly warned him [Putin] in a video meeting he will soon face tearaway inflation at around 70 per cent and shocked him with the sewer analogy."


Putin arrests own military chief and bank boss quits as inner circle crumbles - World News - Mirror Online
 
I'd be more excited if the source could write in complete English sentences but let's hope it's true.
 
The last official death toll from Russia's Defence Ministry was 498 dead Russian military personnel. That was 2 weeks ago. There have been no updates since.

Edit: There are reports - cited as credible by NBC's Richard Engel - that the Russians have brought mobile cremation machines into Ukraine in an effort to hide the number of returning coffins/body-bags from the Russian people: Russians Bring Mobile Cremation Machines Onto Battlefield In Ukraine - YouTube
 
Last edited:
From the UN Ambassador to Ukraine:
The American biopharmaceutical company AbbVie has joined the sanctions against Russia and stopped the supply of Botox and fillers used in aesthetic medicine. This was reported in the company's press service.

----
That's one way to piss off the oligarchs :lol:


 
Political scientist at RAND:


So we were wrong, but if our hypothesis turned out correct, even though it wasn't, we would be right. Maybe.

If you are going to own up to your mistake just do it. Don't try to minimize it by "understanding" how you came to be wrong.

To me it looks like they learned nothing, instead of analyzing why their initial hypothesis was wrong (that Russia would fight a war properly) and learn from it, they are just doubling down.

Edit: sorry for derailing, but these kind of statements irk me
 
Last edited:
How long before Putin comes out and tells China or India not to join NATO or else...
 
So we were wrong, but if our hypothesis turned out correct, even though it wasn't, we would be right. Maybe.

If you are going to own up to your mistake just do it. Don't try to minimize it by "understanding" how you came to be wrong.

To me it looks like they learned nothing, instead of analyzing why their initial hypothesis was wrong (that Russia would fight a war properly) and learn from it, they are just doubling down.
Tbf, I don't think anyone, and I mean literally including all usint , fsb, Putin, his generals, and even Zelensky and his genstaff, expected RA to fall flat onto its face so spectacularly.
 
Anyone read this BBC article? Basically, beyond some dumb face-saving language, Putin's 'only' demanding Donbas (although that's not clear) and formal recognition for Crimea.

Sounds quite easily achievable but of course the biggest issue is the psychopath in the Kremlin and how much (not at all) anyone with their brain intact can trust him.

BBC News - Ukraine conflict: Putin lays out his demands in Turkish phone call
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-60785754
 
Anyone read this BBC article? Basically, beyond some dumb face-saving language, Putin's 'only' demanding Donbas (although that's not clear) and formal recognition for Crimea.

Sounds quite easily achievable but of course the biggest issue is the psychopath in the Kremlin and how much (not at all) anyone with their brain intact can trust him.

BBC News - Ukraine conflict: Putin lays out his demands in Turkish phone call
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-60785754

The only thing that's different from the initial demands seems to be that they realize they can't implement regime change so they are changing the terms of that slightly. They're still demanding Crimea, Donbas, neutrality, and demilitarization. Russia can't expect to lose the war but to get virtually all of its initial war aims.

I don't think Russia genuinely wants to make a deal though since they are trying to move more troops and assets into the theater. There's still a chance that some of the Russian units in Ukraine could break given how long they've been fighting, poor supply, and minimal success. I'm wondering if, in their increasing desperation, Russia tries to make some dangerous push at Odessa or Kyiv that gets destroyed.
 
Anyone read this BBC article? Basically, beyond some dumb face-saving language, Putin's 'only' demanding Donbas (although that's not clear) and formal recognition for Crimea.

Sounds quite easily achievable but of course the biggest issue is the psychopath in the Kremlin and how much (not at all) anyone with their brain intact can trust him.

BBC News - Ukraine conflict: Putin lays out his demands in Turkish phone call
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-60785754
Best case is Ukraine recognising Crimea, some autonomy of Donbas but still part of the country and freedom to join any alliance . But can't see Putin ever agreeing to this, it would like massive failure for him after the big game talk before the invasion.
 
Best case is Ukraine recognising Crimea, some autonomy of Donbas but still part of the country and freedom to join any alliance . But can't see Putin ever agreeing to this, it would like massive failure for him after the big game talk before the invasion.

I think Putin's strategy is to destroy Ukraine before his inevitable withdrawal.
 
I think Putin's strategy is to destroy Ukraine before his inevitable withdrawal.
For that he doesn't need troops, and with the troops there he can't do it. He can shell a few cities but that won't be a complete destruction.
 
Anyone read this BBC article? Basically, beyond some dumb face-saving language, Putin's 'only' demanding Donbas (although that's not clear) and formal recognition for Crimea.

Sounds quite easily achievable but of course the biggest issue is the psychopath in the Kremlin and how much (not at all) anyone with their brain intact can trust him.

BBC News - Ukraine conflict: Putin lays out his demands in Turkish phone call
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-60785754

Not quite: "Ukraine would have to undergo a disarmament process to ensure it wasn't a threat to Russia."

This demand is a total non-starter because it would leave Ukraine at the total mercy of Russia to continue taking further chunks of territory as and when it pleases. Instead, in my view, Ukraine will insist on (a) being free to arm itself to the teeth with defensive weaponry; and (b) joining the EU.
 
Given the Russian dependence on rail transport, I wonder if the Switchblades will enable the Ukrainians to target rail bridges behind Russian lines. I'm not sure if the explosives are big enough though. I guess if you hit a train on one of them...
 
The BBC reports:

"Russian forces are struggling to maintain their offensive in Ukraine, according to the latest intelligence assessment from the UK Ministry of Defence.

"Logistical problems continue to best Russia's faltering invasion of Ukraine," the report says.

Soldiers have not been able to effectively resupply their forward troops with "basic essentials such as food and fuel," due to their limited mobility and lack of air superiority.

"Incessant Ukrainian counterattacks are forcing Russia to divert large numbers of troops to defend their own supply lines. This is severely limiting Russia's offensive potential."

The report echoes the US assessment earlier on Thursday, which said that Russia's troop are "frozen around the country"
.
 
Not quite: "Ukraine would have to undergo a disarmament process to ensure it wasn't a threat to Russia."

This demand is a total non-starter because it would leave Ukraine at the total mercy of Russia to continue taking further chunks of territory as and when it pleases. Instead, in my view, Ukraine will insist on (a) being free to arm itself to the teeth with defensive weaponry; and (b) joining the EU.
I agree that bit is a non-starter but from the tone of the article, it appears more of a face-saving measure.

The biggest issue in any such agreement is literally the fact you'd be signing it with a party who you are 99% sure has their fingers crossed behind their back.
 
The BBC reports:

"Russian forces are struggling to maintain their offensive in Ukraine, according to the latest intelligence assessment from the UK Ministry of Defence.

"Logistical problems continue to best Russia's faltering invasion of Ukraine," the report says.

Soldiers have not been able to effectively resupply their forward troops with "basic essentials such as food and fuel," due to their limited mobility and lack of air superiority.

"Incessant Ukrainian counterattacks are forcing Russia to divert large numbers of troops to defend their own supply lines. This is severely limiting Russia's offensive potential."

The report echoes the US assessment earlier on Thursday, which said that Russia's troop are "frozen around the country"
.

I really hope this is true and the ending of this war with a russian defeat isn't really that far away. There's a lot of dumb jokes about the russian Donbass and Paddington owning the russian bear that would be too insensitive to make otherwise:wenger:

So far, nevermind the result, this is a spectacular miscalculation for Putin. Unifying the West, getting scammed by China/India, mortally wounding Panrussianism and evaporating the prestige of his army, in just one fatal decission. Although one could say that the RA has a long tradition of totally embarrasing itself every 40-50 years or so...
 
So Pentagon now estimates 7k Russian soldiers killed, 14-21k wounded, so roughly 1/5 of Russian forces in Ukraine cannot fight.

So apparently the rule of thumb is that for each fatality there are 2-3 wounded soldiers. Do we know anything about the severity of these wounds? Does this rule of thumb mean that they're out of fighting for a sustained period of time or could it be that some of them have recovered over a few days?
 
So apparently the rule of thumb is that for each fatality there are 2-3 wounded soldiers. Do we know anything about the severity of these wounds? Does this rule of thumb mean that they're out of fighting for a sustained period of time or could it be that some of them have recovered over a few days?

Plus those captured, surrendered or deserted.
 
There are reports - who knows how credible - not only of Russian troops simply parking their vehicles in woods and then abandoning them, but also of troops shooting themselves in the leg with captured Ukrainian ammo so that they can be invalided away from battles without fear of being shot for retreating.
 


He resigned over this the same day the story was published. In addition to increasing funding, the Germans seem to have a lot of work on their hands re: their military and intelligence agencies. Their intel chief was in Ukraine when Russia invaded. :wenger:
 
He resigned over this the same day the story was published. In addition to increasing funding, the Germans seem to have a lot of work on their hands re: their military and intelligence agencies. Their intel chief was in Ukraine when Russia invaded. :wenger:

Nothing like getting intel with your own eyes. Must come from the same Russian General school of leading from the front.
 
Given the Russian dependence on rail transport, I wonder if the Switchblades will enable the Ukrainians to target rail bridges behind Russian lines. I'm not sure if the explosives are big enough though. I guess if you hit a train on one of them...

It would be a strong shift in strategy if Ukraine chooses to do that as means to cripple Russian supply lines even more. I don't think the Ukrainians are going there yet because they are containing the Russians to good effect, but the shift would operate prior to a proper counteroffensive to finish it off. In any case, the Russian army definitely sucks without rail-based infrastructure.
 
The BBC reports:

"... the latest daily assessment from the Institute for the Study of War, a US think tank.

It says the southern port city of Mariupol is likely to fall in coming weeks amid a sustained Russian assault.

ISW analysis finds that Russian forces made no major territorial progress on Thursday, concurring with US and UK intelligence assessments.

But ISW concludes the "total destruction" of Mariupol and increased targeting of its residential areas may lead to its capitulation or eventual capture.

The think tank also says Ukrainian forces on Thursday appear to have inflicted heavy damage on Russian forces around Kyiv, and repelled Russian operations in the Kharkiv region.

It notes, too, that Ukraine's air defence continues to be effective, having shot down 10 Russian aircraft on Wednesday alone.

According to Ukrainian intelligence, Russia may have expended nearly its entire store of precision cruise missiles in the first 20 days of its invasion.

Meanwhile, low morale is being reported among Syrian recruits, including several cases of self-mutilation to avoid fighting. Many mercenaries see deployment to the region as a chance to desert and migrate to the EU, according to Ukrainian intelligence."
 
It would be a strong shift in strategy if Ukraine chooses to do that as means to cripple Russian supply lines even more. I don't think the Ukrainians are going there yet because they are containing the Russians to good effect, but the shift would operate prior to a proper counteroffensive to finish it off. In any case, the Russian army definitely sucks without rail-based infrastructure.

The areas I was looking at were two rail lines from Crimea in the south with 3-4 separate bridges that may be within the 50-ish mile range of the Switchblades. That front, with the exception of Mykolaiev, has been fairly effective, particularly moving northeast through Melitopol, Berdyansk, and to Mauriopol. Forcing them back to trucks along that axis would seem to be a win for Ukraine. The smaller version is definitely not going to take out any bridges, but I haven't found any videos of the bigger version.
 
Last edited:
Several reports of areas around Lviv being Hit

Oh, fecking hell. Just round the corner to my wife’s parents’ business. Lviv airport is right in the city, rather than outside of it, and is also the busiest airport in the country outside of Kyiv, so a really important bit of infrastructure.