Ukraine War Watch Thread

[funkervogt]

I am thinking here of 1914, in what situation can Ukraine impose its conditions on Russia? In two years time Ukraine is going to be in a stronger military position, so that it's going to launch a -real- offensive and reach Moscow?, reconquer -not reoccupy- the south of Ukraine?

Ukraine's economy has been badly damaged since the war started, and if hostilities don't let up, it will be a homeless nation by two years from now.

[caltrek]

I am thinking here of 1914, in what situation can Ukraine impose its conditions on Russia? In two years time Ukraine is going to be in a stronger military position, so that it's going to launch a -real- offensive and reach Moscow?, reconquer -not reoccupy- the south of Ukraine?

Ukraine's economy has been badly damaged since the war started, and if hostilities don't let up, it will be a homeless nation by two years from now.

For Ukraine, there is also the problem of Russia's nuclear weapons. An attempt to "reach Moscow" would likely entail a nuclear response by Russia. The best that could be hoped for by Ukraine is to push Russian forces back to pre-war borders between Russia and Ukraine.

[ibm9000]

"Ukraine's economy has been badly damaged since the war started, and if hostilities don't let up, it will be a homeless nation by two years from now.
For Ukraine, there is also the problem of Russia's nuclear weapons. An attempt to "reach Moscow" would likely entail a nuclear response by Russia.

The best that could be hoped for by Ukraine is to push Russian forces back to pre-war borders between Russia and Ukraine."

Exactly my point. Ukraine is not going to be in a stronger position and is not going to be able to launch that offensive.


"Following botched early attempts in the invasion to capture Kyiv and the second-largest city of Kharkiv..."

What attempts? I haven't seen the Russians plans, anybody has seen them? I remember reading many times about a "surrounded Kiev", it never was, it was never attempted. It was too optimistic to expect negotiations after getting there in two days? Maybe, but I guess part of all that shelling
could have been avoided.

I thought the main point was Ukraine out of NATO, -US didn't want missiles in Cuba after all- but maybe that was just a minor point or even an excuse.
The Sea of Azov is a Russian lake, but still no negotiations. Now Donbas, why not?, was that the plan? Did US abandon Afghanistan because
it couldn't take more casualties?, because it was too expensive? What was the plan?

I think we can translate the recent words of the NATO's Secretary General as: Ukraine lost the war, it's up to Zelensky to decide how much territory
and how much sovereignty -and deaths- he wants to cede to get a peace agreement.
1914 - 1918... they can try, I think we all know who is going to suffer more. Myself, I still wonder why the war did not ended after those two first
days. It was the perfect excuse: we couldn't avoid the war but now they are here, let's negotiate.

[caltrek]

"Ukraine's economy has been badly damaged since the war started, and if hostilities don't let up, it will be a homeless nation by two years from now.
For Ukraine, there is also the problem of Russia's nuclear weapons. An attempt to "reach Moscow" would likely entail a nuclear response by Russia.

The best that could be hoped for by Ukraine is to push Russian forces back to pre-war borders between Russia and Ukraine."

Exactly my point. Ukraine is not going to be in a stronger position and is not going to be able to launch that offensive.


"Following botched early attempts in the invasion to capture Kyiv and the second-largest city of Kharkiv..."

What attempts? I haven't seen the Russians plans, anybody has seen them? I remember reading many times about a "surrounded Kiev", it never was, it was never attempted. It was too optimistic to expect negotiations after getting there in two days? Maybe, but I guess part of all that shelling
could have been avoided.

Well, first let me preface my comment by indicating my agreement with your main point - that a negotiated settlement is a desirable outcome. Such a settlement may very well involve a little give and take on both sides. I also think that you make a good point regarding seeing Russian invasion plans. I have not seen such plans either. However, I have read reports that invasion plans, or at least componets to said plans, were captured.

Also, again from the reports I saw there was an attempt to "surround Ukraine." Apparently that attempt was botched. Several reasons:

• The determination to resist by Ukraine may (or may not) have been underestimated.

• Logistical problems related to the surrounding swampy terrain. This meant that re-supply was more or less restricted to a rather narrow invasion route and invading forces were in turn themselves surrounded.

• Morale problems experience by Russian forces

Now, some might accuse me of falling for American and/or Ukrainian propaganda, so I am open to counterevidence. Especially since I do not consider myself a military expert or an expert on Ukrainian geography.

I thought the main point was Ukraine out of NATO, -US didn't want missiles in Cuba after all- but maybe that was just a minor point or even an excuse.
The Sea of Azov is a Russian lake, but still no negotiations. Now Donbas, why not?, was that the plan? Did US abandon Afghanistan because
it couldn't take more casualties?, because it was too expensive? What was the plan?

I think we can translate the recent words of the NATO's Secretary General as: Ukraine lost the war, it's up to Zelensky to decide how much territory
and how much sovereignty -and deaths- he wants to cede to get a peace agreement.

1914 - 1918... they can try, I think we all know who is going to suffer more. Myself, I still wonder why the war did not ended after those two first
days. It was the perfect excuse: we couldn't avoid the war but now they are here, let's negotiate.

Again, no disagreement on my part from these observations. I would add that many have indicated that they felt Putin's invasion has to be met with a strong and sustained response, or he will simply try again later. While not being a military expert, that does make a certain amount of sense to me. So, as I have written before, a negotiated settlement would have to include guarantees of Ukrainian security. Now, one way to do that would be to provide NATO protection to Ukraine, but many argue that such a possibility was the provocation that stated the war in the first place. So, no easy answer. At least, not until both sides wear themselves down sufficiently that they are willing to compromise.

[ibm9000]

I am not a military expert either, -probably Liddell Hart was, but that doesn't mean he was right every time- but I like Military History, and Wargames.

"Captured plans" has happened many times, but plans are never set in stone, not even Soviet plans. Let's say that a part of those plans was an advance on Kiev, that is a good plan, you get there and you negotiate; if you surround the city you add pressure, still a good plan. Then, they retreated, that is a defeat, but to stay there would have been a botched job. Mind, Russia announced that they were retreating and they did, no great counteroffensive, no brilliant manoeuvres, Ukraine reoccupied, not conquered the territory -like Montecassino was reoccupied-; they said they were leaving and they left. Just to compare, the US Army retreated from Vietnam and Afghanistan, so it was defeated, so they are a bunch of incompetents, right? Me, I don't think so.

The thing is that there is a lot of: Russia is evil and they are doing everything wrong, the Ukrainians are all heroes and everything they do is brilliant. We don't have evidence of any of that, only partial -and biased- information, a picture of a destroyed tank is just a destroyed tank. In 10 years, maybe, we will be able to read documents and I am pretty sure historians will provide pretty different conclusions.
Not for "a certain Russian" and some others on the opposite side, who happily forget the Invasion of Iraq... and everything else that is not nice to
mention.
It's a war, the only thing you are going to find is war criminals, always: Stop quoting the law, we carry weapons.

Plans are overoptimistic, you don't plan your defeat. Logistical problems?, again, always, you never have enough and planning otherwise is expensive, you don't do that. You don't have to be an expert, just to look at the main roads, they were going to have problems, obviously. Surrounded?, yes, I saw that in some maps, and what happened there?, I cannot remember reading anything about thousands of prisoners. Morale?,
one guy -a prisoner, that in itself is a war crime- crying for mam on tv? I don't know, maybe a lot of partial "information" about it, what do we know of the morale on the other side of the hill? I just read that the Americans don't know where their weapons go or how they are being used, that is not a smart move. I am not trying to excuse Russian incompetence, -military incompetence, actually: "War is a competition of incompetence -the least incompetent usually win. Pakistani General Tiger."- but if I have to reach a conclusion and I look at the south of the map, how incompetent are the Ukrainians?
In short, let's see in 10 years.

"they felt Putin's invasion has to be met with a strong and sustained response, or he will simply try again later." By "they" you mean NATO?, US is not going to start WW3 for Ukraine, it is no in its interest and it was clear from the very beginning -another reason to wonder what Zelensky is expecting to get.
Russia will do again, as US will. I read years ago that US will invade Iran, but not Saudi Arabia because that is a real democracy and they don't
support the terrorist; unlike US, actually. Pakistan has nukes provided by US, what is the excuse then?, not you because I don't like you?
USA will impose its will, just like Russia. I cannot -me- smile at one and complaint about the other.

(and I am surprised that the outraged voices don't show their disagreement with us)

[Certain Russian user]

No any analytics, just a few pictures which I think somehow interconnected:



Perhaps overestimation, but you have to take into account the changed narrative: now this is not "we're winning, and very soon..." but "we're bleeding, and if you will not send us more weapons..."

According to other, IMHO more plausible estimation, Ukrainian causalities are about 300 daily vs Russian 10-15 daily. And therefore:





Here you can see one of many raids to catch the new conscripts (volunteers are long gone). This time, on the beach, and these two guys on the second picture obviously couldn't escape. Very soon they will meet the Russian army face to face... well, I wish them no harm and hope they will immediately surrender. Zelensky regime doesn't worth their lives.

These pictures, among other things, impressed me because I just returned from the beach myself... without any risk of being drafted...



Seriously? And what about "Russia has already lost" and "this should only be decided on the battlefield"?

[caltrek]

^^^ Inadvertently, you point to a major problem in this conflict. Macron and a lot of us in the West have hoped for and called for a negotiated solution to this conflict. Yet, calls to do so are then immediately interpreted as "weakness" or "throwing their allies under the bus" or some other such similar nonsense. Now, again taking your argument that Ukraine is part of Russia and that Ukrainians are "our people", we simply don't want to see you folks killing each other off in some kind of mad suicidal rush to control territory. So, this sets up the dynamic where one faction of your civil war believes it can "win" if it just keeps fighting, which in turn is responded to by the other faction believing that it can "win". Leaving the rest of us to wonder what the hell as gotten into you people? How can you be so idiotic as to indulge in this mutual suicide pact of a civil war?

Sure, collectively we tend to favor one side over the other:

• One side has shown itself to be the clear aggressor. Generally, we don't think of bullies as being strong masculine types. We think of them in much more negative terms than that.

• Prior to the invasion, Ukraine seemed to be struggling to establish a genuine democracy within its borders. To all outward appearances, this seems to frighten Putin, for reasons that should be obvious. We tend to favor democratic elements because we treasure such democracy ourselves. Some more than others, but that is another story.

• Whatever else you and others might think of modern capitalism, it favors stability over the kind of chaos caused by war. There is a preference for developing good trading partners and in that way cooperating with others. Of course, as your military types our finding out the hard way, we also have a vigorous arms manufacturing sector that is more than happy to export arms to one side of your civil war. To paraphrase what you once communicated to me "whether I like it or not." Putin has so bungled the international public relations effort in this regard that there is little in the way of public opposition to paying the arms manufacturers for providing such exports. Other capitalist elites also see this as a potentially good "investment" in the "colonialist" sense of the word. Again "whether I like it or not."

So, your obsession with who is "winning" and who is "losing" misses the broader point. That being that a civil war is tragic and counterproductive for all concerned. Put another way, you folks are being played for being fools. You are killing yourselves off over a sort of identity angst over what is the best way to preserve Russia and what is essentially a dispute over real estate. Destroying villages in order to save them and other such nonsense. The same sort of mistaken nonsense that characterized the U.S and its involvement in Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan. (Although in Afghanistan Al Qaeda terrorists very much forced the issue and were promptly decimated for their aggressiveness). So, you invited me to go to hell. Now it is you and "your people" that are heading in that direction. Whether I like it or not.

[funkervogt]

Francis Fukuyama's predictions about the war, three months on:

Russia is heading for an outright defeat in Ukraine. Russian planning was incompetent, based on a flawed assumption that Ukrainians were favorable to Russia and that their military would collapse immediately following an invasion. Russian soldiers were evidently carrying dress uniforms for their victory parade in Kyiv rather than extra ammo and rations. Putin at this point has committed the bulk of his entire military to this operation—there are no vast reserves of forces he can call up to add to the battle. Russian troops are stuck outside various Ukrainian cities where they face huge supply problems and constant Ukrainian attacks.

The collapse of their position could be sudden and catastrophic, rather than happening slowly through a war of attrition. The army in the field will reach a point where it can neither be supplied nor withdrawn, and morale will vaporize. This is at least true in the north; the Russians are doing better in the south, but those positions would be hard to maintain if the north collapses.

https://www.americanpurpose.com/blog/fu ... or-defeat/

The Russians did the smart thing and withdrew their troops from northern and northwestern Ukraine, and sent them to the south and east to reinforce the forces already there. We'll never know if Russia's armies would have "collapsed" had they stuck with their original, multi-front strategy. Maybe Fukuyama was right.

Putin will not survive the defeat of his army. He gets support because he is perceived to be a strongman; what does he have to offer once he demonstrates incompetence and is stripped of his coercive power?

This is still Putin's reality. In a sense, he's fighting for his own life. However, I doubt that an "underwhelming victory" (the likeliest outcome to the war, IMO) will make insiders lose so much faith in Putin that they will remove him from power. He still seems firmly in control.

A Russian defeat will make possible a “new birth of freedom,” and get us out of our funk about the declining state of global democracy. The spirit of 1989 will live on, thanks to a bunch of brave Ukrainians.

It has yet to be seen.

[Certain Russian user]

It has yet to be seen.

The "spirit of 1989" will not return, regardless of anything what may still happen in Ukraine. This spirit, as well as "End of History" idea, was a product of western triumphalism at the end of Cold War (it was so tempting to think that this "perfect state" would last forever and to "cancel" any further changes). This naive concept is increasingly out of touch with our real world, and history (I mean real history) doesn't "end" by command, especially by command of philosophers...

[Certain Russian user]

According to unconfirmed reports, Ukrainian forces in Severodonetsk began to surrender. In general, it was repeat of Mariupol: retreat to industrial area, take local civilians as hostages, then bargain for surrender (politically correct and acceptable terms: "extraction", "relocation", and "evacuation")... but, unlike Azovstal, this industrial area was not prepared in advance and (after that same Azovstal) morale was already broken.

If not surrender, they may sit there for few extra weeks, but strategically, it's all over:

[funkervogt]

It has yet to be seen.

The "spirit of 1989" will not return, regardless of anything what may still happen in Ukraine. This spirit, as well as "End of History" idea, was a product of western triumphalism at the end of Cold War (it was so tempting to think that this "perfect state" would last forever and to "cancel" any further changes). This naive concept is increasingly out of touch with our real world, and history (I mean real history) doesn't "end" by command, especially by command of philosophers...

Not everyone during the 1990s thought the triumphalism would persist. Research "the Unipolar Moment."
https://thediplomat.com/2016/04/china-r ... ar-moment/

Also, Francis Fukuyama's 1992 declaration that the "End of History" had arrived was somewhat misunderstood by people.
https://www.yahoo.com/video/fukuyama-en ... 37504.html

The core of his thesis was that the liberal democratic/mixed economic politico-economic system had proven itself superior to all other systems, and that it was only a matter of time before it encompassed the whole world. That reality clearly has not yet arrived, though there's still a chance it could in the long run. However, I see three major challenges to its rise:

1) Future success of the Chinese model. Instead of democratic, it is technocratic and controlled by a highly competent oligarchy. Citizens willingly trade political freedoms like free speech and the right to vote for higher standards of living.

2) Decline of liberal democracy in the West. In America, being a "liberal" and supporting the principles of "liberal democracy" are two different things, and the gulf is widening. And of course, conservatives are also losing faith in democratic governance and are becoming more tribal.

3) AGI takeover. In such a world, it wouldn't make sense to let humans have anything more than a symbolic say over governance, the economy, or anything important, really. It would be like us giving chimps the right to vote and own real estate today.

[ibm9000]

According to unconfirmed reports...
Ukrainian tanks are about to attack Moscow.

Yes, in combat, soldiers surrender, soldiers from both sides. Yes, again, you do retreat to defensible positions. Hostages?, have you been interviewing... how many of them? When an army retreats, a lot of people retreat with it. Yes, the besieging army will offer terms -they want to redeploy those troops, they don't want to spent more ammo there and, maybe, they want that real state now- and the besieged army will ask for them -after a time, what's the point; unless we are talking about Camerone. In a few hours, you prepare a position, in a couple of days you do a decent job, in a week... sorry, how long has that fighting going on? That is what troops -those not at the front line at that moment- do, prepare positions and fall-back positions; any builders in that town? Morale was... what?, again, how many interviews?

You are using the wrong word, taking that place would be a tactical success, just another town. A northern armoured thrust towards Kramatorsk together with another one coming from the south would probably have strategic consequences, but that is what the Stavka has decided not to do.
I still think that the advance on Kiev was just a bargaining chit.

If anybody starts talking about the heroes of Severodonetsk, I would be asking: what heroes?, do we even know if they are doing a decent job?

Oh!, and according to unconfirmed reports, the Earth is flat.

[Certain Russian user]

According to unconfirmed reports...
Ukrainian tanks are about to attack Moscow.
...
Oh!, and according to unconfirmed reports, the Earth is flat.

Why so nervous? And yes, if you read this thread since late february, there are a lot of moronic "Ukrainian tanks are about to attack Moscow" - style posts here.

Yes, in combat, soldiers surrender, soldiers from both sides.

The main question is "how much", right? In Mariupol, ALL Ukrainian troops eventually surrendered (or "were evacuated", as it war worded in Ukrainian media). The same will eventually happen in Severodonetsk. Those trapped in industrial area are well aware of that. They will either die or surrender, there is no any third option.

Hostages?

Yes, hostages. In Mariupol, civilians were lured / dragged to Azovstal, then not allowed to leave, then their "defenders" tried to trade them for food (15 civilians per ton). That's the truth of life...

[caltrek]

^^^Vladimir Putin is holding all of Ukraine hostage. Russian forces need to withdraw from Ukraine now. It was the Russian army invasion that created these hostage situations. Pro-Russian commentators need to pull their heads out of certain body orifices and acknowledge what is actually going on in the world.

[Certain Russian user]

Not everyone during the 1990s thought the triumphalism would persist. Research "the Unipolar Moment."
https://thediplomat.com/2016/04/china-r ... ar-moment/

OK, thanks for the link, this was interesting (though I'm almost entirely disagree).

In turn, here is another piece of text, which IMHO more accurately reflects today's reality (sorry in advance for rough translation):

American hegemony is over. Whatever the outcome of current conflict, major countries have received a clear image of how this "unipolarity" worked and how, in relation to Russia, these transmission belts were set in motion and thereby revealed. In the coming years they will do everything to ensure that to cut them off. The questions we're now asking ourselves: about technological, financial, digital, etc. sovereignty — are now being asked in every country that aspires for at least some independence in the 21st century. World trade will change: now that unilateral sanctions and asset seizures have been used as weapons, no one will believe that the world of dollar, digital platforms and "British law" is a "safe haven". By attacking us they (i.e. West) had the only chance to save this mechanism of control - if this "sanctions blitzkrieg" worked. But it failed, and in the struggle for attrition, the chances are no longer for those who have iPhones and dollars, but for those who have food, oil and army.

Globalism stood on three pillars: the dollar as the world's reserve currency, the US and NATO armies as the most powerful and expensive military machine in the world, and digital infrastructure as the main communication system controlled from a single center. In the coming years, there will be a rebalancing along all these lines: the role of the dollar will fall, countries will strengthen their defense capabilities, and digital and technological sovereignty will become one of the key priorities for everyone - not just us.

What is happening now? There is a preparation for a collision of new rising powers with the remnants of the old world order. Russia acted as a skirmisher, and no wonder that all the bumps are now falling on us. But this is already clear that we will withstand. And when this becomes obvious to everyone, the world will learn to say "no" to Americans. Moreover, Europe will be the first to understand this, which is now, with a gnashing of teeth, aware of the fact that the proxy war against Russia is being waged almost entirely at their expense and against their own vital interests.

What do we count on in this confrontation? First, on ourselves. We will not retreat: neither in Ukraine, nor in global politics. Second, on the strength and wisdom of leaders and peoples of the non-Western world who have adopted the principles of openness, cooperation and free trade, and who will not let them to be destroyed by those who proclaimed and promoted them for as long as it was beneficial for them. Third, on the historical inevitability - the future belongs to those who develop faster than the rest of the world, and today this is not the West at all.

Our experience of survival and development in the face of a military conflict and external pressure will be important and useful not only for us. Those decisions that we make, those technologies that we develop and apply - in all areas, from defense and security to social policy and business - will later become a ready-made package for any country striving to not nominal, but real sovereignty. And we will gladly share them in order to make the world freer, fairer, more equal and multipolar in the full sense of the word. Let's do it together.

[caltrek]

I guess Russia wants to end Western hegemony so that it can better foster the cause of creating famine throughout the world.

Russia Putting World at the Risk of Famine, EU Top Diplomat Warns
June 18, 2022

Introduction:

(AFP via The Times of Israel) BRUSSELS, Belgium — Russia is putting the world at risk of famine through its blockade of Ukraine’s shipments of grains and restrictions on its own exports, EU foreign policy chief Josep Borrell said Saturday.

The threat to food security and a “battle of narrative” with Russia on Western-imposed sanctions on Moscow over Ukraine will dominate European Union foreign ministers’ talks in Luxembourg on Monday.

“We are ready to work with the UN and our partners to prevent any unwanted impact on global food security,” Borrell said in an article published on his official blog.

“Russia’s conscious political choice is to weaponize grain exports and use them as a tool for blackmail against anyone that opposes its aggression in Ukraine,” Borrell said.

“Russia turned the Black Sea into a war zone, blocking shipments of grain and fertilizer from Ukraine but also affecting Russian merchant shipping. Russia is also applying quotas and taxes on its grain exports,” he added.

https://www.timesofisrael.com/russia-pu ... mat-warns/

[weatheriscool]

Russia frees captive medic who filmed Mariupol's horror
Source: AP

By VASILISA STEPANENKO and LORI HINNANT

TALLINN, Estonia (AP) — A celebrated Ukrainian medic whose footage was smuggled out of the besieged city of Mariupol by an Associated Press team was freed by Russian forces on Friday, three months after she was taken captive on the streets of the city.

Yuliia Paievska is known in Ukraine as Taira, a nickname she chose in the World of Warcraft video game. Using a body camera, she recorded 256 gigabytes of her team’s efforts over two weeks to save the wounded, including both Russian and Ukrainian soldiers.

She transferred the clips to an Associated Press team, the last international journalists in the Ukrainian city of Mariupol, one of whom fled with it embedded in a tampon on March 15. Taira and a colleague were taken prisoner by Russian forces on March 16, the same day a Russian airstrike hit a theater in the city center, killing around 600 people, according to an Associated Press investigation.

“It was such a great sense of relief. Those sound like such ordinary words, and I don’t even know what to say,” her husband, Vadim Puzanov, told The Associated Press late Friday, breathing deeply to contain his emotion. Puzanov said he spoke by phone with Taira, who was en route to a Kyiv hospital, and feared for her health.

Read more: https://apnews.com/article/russia-ukrai ... 43385bb7fe

[weatheriscool]

French president visits Kyiv suburb, decries 'massacre'
Source: AP

By DAVID KEYTON, JOHN LEICESTER and SYLVIE CORBET

IRPIN, Ukraine (AP) — French President Emmanuel Macron said Thursday that there are signs of war crimes in a Kyiv suburb following “massacres” by Russian forces.

He spoke in the town of Irpin while on a visit with the German, Italian and Romanian leaders to show support for Ukraine. He denounced the “barbarism” of the attacks that devastated the town, and praised the courage of residents of Irpin and other Kyiv region towns who held back Russians forces from attacking the capital.

The four European leaders arrived earlier in Kyiv to the sound of air raid sirens as they made a high-profile show of collective European support for the Ukrainian people as they resist Russia’s invasion.

The visit, which includes a planned meeting with President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, carries heavy symbolic weight given that the three Western European powers have faced criticism for not providing Ukraine with the scale of weaponry that Zelenskyy has been asking for.

Read more: https://apnews.com/article/russia-ukrai ... de23b52f8e

[ibm9000]

"Why so nervous? And yes, if you read this thread since late February, there are a lot of moronic..." Sorry, are you calling your own post "moronic"? "Unconfirmed reports" or "fairy tales" sound a bit like the same thing.

I thought the question was Severodonetsk... and I am afraid there is a third option, they may slip away, it has happened many times in History; even a fourth one, -but I don't think this one is going to happen- a counterattack, a real one.

Again, we were talking about Severodonetsk... so, how many interviews, please?

[ibm9000]

Pity no French President visited Fallujah...

And the last coup d'etat in Turkey was stopped neither by twitter nor by "the people", so I don't know what courage of what residents hold back what,
but at least, he is a President, he is supposed to say things like that.