Ukraine War Watch Thread

[ibm9000]

"The idea that China is going to be negotiating the outcome of a war that is a totally unjust war for Ukraine is just not rational," Biden said.

It is rational to give weapons to keep the war going on without pressuring to negotiate the end of the war (and imposing sanctions on the other side).

[raklian]

Ukrainian drone vs. Russian soldier

[ibm9000]

Ukrainian drone vs. Russian soldier

What do we actually see in that edited video?

A (wounded?) soldier (he wears some camo and carries a weapon), alone, in the middle of nowhere, has a drone (almost certain) dropping hand grenades around him. Then the camera goes black: destroyed drone?

[ibm9000]

Russia still grinding forward in Bakhmut.
No to a Chinese Peace (nor to any peace agreement).
They got the (4?) tanks, 75 (or 150) combat ready in June? (Sending unprepared troops forward?)
Is Russia going to do something from now until then? (Even if only to grind forward).
After Bakhmut, is Ukraine digging trenches in Kramatorks and Sloviansk? (Spoiler: armies dig, always).
Anyone read anything (Bild) about a time limit (from US), Autumn, in case of a failed (Ukrainian) offensive, to start negotiating? (Open season for killing Ukrainians until then).
Providing weapons to countries at war is an old and well respected business.

Oh!, and it seems that one Russian soldier died under a drone attack. (This information has not been confirmed).

[raklian]

[weatheriscool]

In an Epic Battle of Tanks, Russia Was Routed, Repeating Earlier Mistakes

A three-week fight in the town of Vuhledar in southern Ukraine produced what Ukrainian officials say was the biggest tank battle of the war so far, and a stinging setback for the Russians.

KURAKHOVE, Ukraine — Before driving into battle in their mud-spattered war machine, a T-64 tank, the three-man Ukrainian crew performs a ritual.

The commander, Pvt. Dmytro Hrebenok, recites the Lord’s Prayer. Then, the men walk around the tank, patting its chunky green armor.

“We say, ‘Please, don’t let us down in battle,’” said Sgt. Artyom Knignitsky, the mechanic. “‘Bring us in and bring us out.’”

Their respect for their tank is understandable. Perhaps no weapon symbolizes the ferocious violence of war more than the main battle tank. Tanks have loomed over the conflict in Ukraine in recent months — militarily and diplomatically — as both sides prepared for offensives. Russia pulled reserves of tanks from Cold War-era storage, and Ukraine prodded Western governments to supply American Abrams and German Leopard 2 tanks.

The sophisticated Western tanks are expected on the battlefield in the next several months. The new Russian armor turned up earlier — and in its first wide-scale deployment was decimated.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/03/01/worl ... =url-share

[ibm9000]

Ukraine war ‘over’ unless EU boosts military support.
...
Much more has to be done and much quicker. There is still a lot to be done. We have to increase and accelerate our military support. It currently
takes almost 10 months for the European army to buy a bullet (sic) for the calibre of 155mm, almost one year, and almost three years to buy an
air-to-air missile. This is not in accordance with the war situation in which we live. Josep Borrell, the EU foreign affairs chief.

Moscow can no more lose the war with Ukraine than Washington could lose a war with Mexico.

Where is the big Russian offensive?

If it's working don't repair it.

A friend of mine mentioned The Great War, I have no idea who this "Serge" is, but we know that Russia has more guns and more ammo. It is all very
nice to draw arrows over a map, but maybe we are not going to see any Russian WW2 offensive (combined-arms-operational-whatever), maybe there is no need.

https://bigserge.substack.com/p/russo-u ... hrodingers

(I don't know his shoe size, in case that has anything to do with the merits of his analysis, but I think a critical reading of his opinion is going to be useful).
He does mention Vuhledar.

[ibm9000]

Russia pulled reserves of tanks from Cold War-era storage, and Ukraine prodded Western governments to supply American Abrams and German Leopard 2 tanks.

Yes, with "old" thermal sights... but still thermal sights, Western tanks are yet to come (in any number) and do something.

Any Ukrainian authority "claiming" it own casualties for that victory in Vuhledar? Any Russian Tiktok "reported" how many Ukrainians casualties?

Expectation tended to outrun execution. ACW.

[ibm9000]

So far, the exchange rate of trading our lives for theirs favors the Russians. If this goes on like this, we could run out.

One Ukrainian commander around Bakhmut, according to The Wall Street Journal.

Ukrainian officials admit that their artillery is outgunned by 9 to 1 in critical sectors of the front.
US is using its ammo stockpiles in Israel and S. Korea to arm Ukraine. Is that the Autumn ultimatum, US "running out" of ammo?
321 tanks promised to Ukraine. How many will be ready to act together and when?; with new crews.
How many state-of-the-art Russians tanks have been used? What did they achieve according to the western media (apart from those 100.000 sq km)?
Active fronts: Bakhmut and Kreminna; Vuhledar?, Avdiivka? What offensive is Ukraine going to launch?

[wjfox]

Sergei Lavrov: Russian foreign minister laughed at for Ukraine war claims

10 minutes ago

Russian foreign minister, Sergei Lavrov, was laughed at in Delhi after saying the Ukraine war was "launched against us".

Lavrov claimed Russia was trying to stop the Ukraine war, which began after its own full-scale invasion in February 2022.

He was speaking to a conference audience in Delhi on Friday, after a G20 foreign ministers' meeting.

https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-europe-64848508

[caltrek]

One Year Later in Ukraine
by Ryan McMaken
March 4 , 2023

Introduction:

(The Mises Institute via Eurasia Review) It’s been a year since the Russian invasion of Ukraine. In spite of claims from the regime and its media allies that Russia was the next Third Reich and would soon roll through half of Europe, it turns out that was never even remotely true.

In fact, things have unfolded more or less just like we predicted here at mises.org: the Russians aren’t even close to occupying any place in Europe beyond eastern Ukraine. It’s not Munich 1938. Economic sanctions have not crippled the Russian regime. Most of the world remains ambivalent on the conflict. The conflict will likely end with a negotiated settlement—contrary to what the Washington wants.

The fact is that in spite of the United States’ and North Atlantic Treaty Organization’s (NATO) efforts to turn Ukraine into World War III, the war in Ukraine remains a regional conflict. It seems most of the world is uninterested in making sacrifices to carry out US policy in Ukraine and that many see the inherent hypocrisy behind US talk about respecting national sovereignty.

There’s also an important lesson here about listening to the war maximalists who incessantly promote full-scale war as the “solution” to every international crisis. The US clearly wants to fight the war to the last Ukrainian, in what the US is packaging as a global crusade in the style of World War II. But, it seems now that more pragmatic thinkers—i.e., the French and the Germans—recognize that negotiations are the more humane solution.

They Wanted a “Munich Moment”

Within days of the Russian invasion, the Western global hegemonists got to work claiming the invasion was essentially a war of global conquest. For instance, Matthew Kroenig in Foreign Policy stated that Vladimir Putin had shown a clear interest in “resurrecting the former Russian Empire, and other vulnerable Eastern European countries—Poland, Romania, or the Baltic states—might be next.” Kroenig immediately concluded that the US’s military budget should be doubled.

Read more here: https://www.eurasiareview.com/04032023 ... ng-oped/

caltrek’s comment: I think what should be kept in mind is the extent to which Russia has not moved beyond invading Ukraine is very much a result of the opposition that it faced in the Ukraine, as well as the membership so many other European countries have in NATO. So, an analogy to a “Munich Moment” may not entirely be inappropriate.

I do agree with calls for a negotiated settlement. Again such a settlement should recognize the legitimate security needs and concerns of both sides. Given a lack of behind the scenes knowledge, it is hard to determine if one side has sabotaged such a possible outcome more than the other. What is clear, despite some rather outlandish claims put forward by a certain Russian diplomat and what is reported to be an anonymous colonel, is that Russia engaged in an invasion of the Ukraine that went well beyond any actions that can be pointed to as constituting a provocation. Their reaction was far from proportional and did more to immiserate Russians living in the Ukraine than anything the Ukrainian government did in that regard.

The source of this article should also be noted: “The Mises Institute, founded in 1982, teaches the scholarship of Austrian economics, freedom, and peace. The liberal intellectual tradition of Ludwig von Mises (1881-1973) and Murray N. Rothbard (1926-1995) guides us. Accordingly, the Mises Institute seeks a profound and radical shift in the intellectual climate: away from statism and toward a private property order. The Mises Institute encourages critical historical research, and stands against political correctness.”

So, apparently the institute is not concerned with being correct in its analysis.

[caltrek]

What Is the Russian Volunteer Corps?
by David Brennan
March 2, 2023

Introduction:

(Newsweek) The Russian Volunteer Corps (RDK)—a grouping of Russians fighting for Ukraine against Moscow's ongoing invasion of the country—on Thursday claimed to have undertaken a cross-border operation in which they attacked Russian military units.

Russian media claimed Thursday that a group of Ukrainian "saboteurs" had crossed the border into Bryansk Oblast, which borders Ukraine and Belarus, engaging in firefights, taking several people hostage, and inflicting civilian casualties.

Ukrainian officials quickly dismissed the reports as a Russian false flag. But the RDK then announced on its official Telegram channel that a group of its fighters had indeed crossed into Russia, though denied targeting any civilians or taking any hostages.

The Telegram post, which included a video of two armed men holding up an RDK flag in front of a Russian post box, declared that reports of hostage-taking or civilian casualties were "a lie of the Kremlin propagandists."

Further Extract:

Mark Voyger, a former special adviser for Russian and Eurasian affairs to then-commander of U.S. Army Europe, General Ben Hodges, told Newsweek he expected the Kremlin to leverage the situation to expand its war, regardless of whether the operation proved legitimate or a false flag.

Read more here: https://www.newsweek.com/what-russian- ... e-1785038

[caltrek]

Here is a Tass version of this story that reports on Putin's reaction:

Putin calls attack by Ukrainian militants in Bryansk Region 'act of terror'
March 2, 2023

Introduction:

MOSCOW, March 2. /TASS/. The attack by Ukrainian saboteurs in the Bryansk Region bordering Ukraine is a terrorist act, Russian President Vladimir Putin said at a meeting with participants of the pilot educational program Mentor School.

Soldiers and officers of the Russian Armed Forces are now courageously carrying out their duty, protecting Russia, Putin stressed. "Protecting against neo-Nazis and against terrorists such as those who were torturing and killing people in Donbass for eight years, such as those who murdered Darya Dugina in Moscow, such as those who today carried out another act of terror, committed another crime, infiltrated the border area and opened fire on civilians," the president stressed.

The saboteurs were well aware that they were attacking a civilian car. "They saw it was a civilian car, saw that civilians and children were inside, that it was just a Niva car, but no, they opened fire on them," Putin said.

It is people like this who "set out to deprive the Russian people of their historical memory, deprive us of our history, our traditions, and language," President Putin stressed.

"This is violence, real crime, committed exactly by the neo-Nazis I’ve just mentioned, and by their masters. I'm sure that these very masters won’t remember today's crime. No one will even pay heed to it," Putin went on to say. "They won't succeed, we will put the squeeze on them," he vowed.

Read more here: https://tass.com/defense/1584115?utm_s ... ial_share

[wjfox]

[ibm9000]

Old news...

To begin with, nobody on the Russian side made reference to tactical nuclear weapons; the entire concept is a western interpolation. Using low yield nuclear weapons would be more than just counterproductive, it would completely smash important elements of Putin’s overarching political framework for the war. Russia aims to retain the support of key Eurasian powers like China and India, keep the United States and NATO from becoming directly involved in the Ukraine War, and maintain the attritive tempo of the war by preventing the transfer of weapons like ATACMs to Ukraine. Deploying a tactical nuclear weapon would shatter all these objectives. It also strains credulity to presume that Russia, which began the war with a very light hand, sparing critical infrastructure at the onset and generally handling the Ukrainians gently, would skip multiple escalation rungs and resort directly to a very blunt instrument.
That the destruction of the Nordstream Pipeline was simply tolerated is strong evidence of a mutual commitment to avoid escalation. Compare this to the terrorist/special operation attack on the Kerch Bridge, which prompted a ferocious punitive barrage by Russia and intensified strikes on Ukraine’s energy grid.
Russian Defense Minister Shoygu had a phone conversation with his American counterpart Lloyd Austin, after which the US government stated that it has seen no evidence that Russia intends to use nuclear weaponry. Putin followed up on this with his own statement that Russia has no plans to use nuclear weapons and that it would make neither military nor political sense to do so.

...with perspective.

[erowind]

.

[ibm9000]

The failure to end the war reflects not only the undoubtedly great strength of the forces sustaining it, but reflects, as well, the limits and defects of the best current understanding of those forces and of the overall system in which they operate: an inadequate grasp of all the motives and institutions that matter, and of their vulnerabilities to change. That is not so necessarily; but I believe that it is the case. As the war goes on, the meaning of its nature and of its continuance becomes more and more challenging.
In my opinion this war, even at this late stage, needs not only to be resisted; it remains to be understood.
I am speaking of the limitations not only of public awareness but of the best analyses by "experts" —former officials, radical critics, journalists, or academic specialists. No one known to me —and that includes myself— seems to possess as yet an adequate comprehension of the forces, institutions, motives, beliefs, and decisions that have led us as a nation to do what we (they) have done to the people of Indochina (Ukraine) as long as we (and they) have (and are).

D. Ellsberg.

[wjfox]

[ibm9000]

Just like Hiroshima.

[ibm9000]

Madoff as your mechanic.

You trust that the mechanic repairing the brakes is going to do a good job. At least, that he is going to jail once you are dead.

How responsible is a PM who is betting his country on the goodwill of someone else?

How may rounds of ammo is he going to get if suddenly there is a coup d'etat in Saudi Arabia, an escalation around Taiwan or between Iraq-Iran? What if US have to request a favour from Russia? (In 1971 Nixon hinted China to attack India).
Yes, there could be another scenario where R. has to pull back; I don't think "bread revolts" is going to be one of them.

Ukraine lost the war.
In any one of those situations it has to surrender, instead of negotiate. To be precise, those negotiations are going to be far, far away from even.

Let's say that in July U. has 200 of those western and 200 more Soviet-era tanks ready (and enough ammo, oil, SAM, pontoons... for how long?) to launch an offensive. Ukraine did not collapse, why R. is going to?, what objective information do we have to affirm that a Russian collapse is the only possibility? U. claims 1.000 tanks, are those 400 immortal?
Russia may well cede 20 or even 50km (that big arrow on a map) while pummeling the advancing troops, R. still has planes, artillery and tanks. Maybe not even that, as U. has to use them to plug holes in the line.

Ukraine has lost the war.
It has no ammo (of its own) and if (when?) that offensive fails, what then?, another 6 months of R. grinding forward? US already gave an ultimatum.
Betting on one card and piling corpses...

Sanctions on Russia... the war goes on.
No negotiations... the war goes on.
Weapons for Ukraine... the war goes on.
Zelensky should have been fighting for serious negotiations, not for promises.

I am going to bet now.
-None of those alternative scenarios is going to happen.
-The offensive will fail.
-US will tell Zelensky to reach an agreement.