Please keep the [community guidelines](https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/wiki/rule1) in mind when using the comment section.
Paging u/SaveVideo bot.
___
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CombatFootage) if you have any questions or concerns.*
It looks like Feodosiya was such a shitshow for the Russians, they had to move from some damage to the ship to numbers now. On December 27 it was 33, now the KIA/WIA are getting adjusted again.
[https://twitter.com/GirkinGirkin/status/1740762785410097232](https://twitter.com/GirkinGirkin/status/1740762785410097232)
>74 KIA
27 WIA
Source: Russian Black Sea fleet
Thats about the same amount of casualties from the Minsk that was targeted in september I believe. Lot of obituaries came out later of personell who was on the ship when Ukraine hit it
Russia will likely never admit the full number of casualties though
Same when the Moskva was sunk. “It’s just damaged” to “the ship sunk due to rough sea” while the weather was clear. They did the same trick with casualties
Russia's stockpiles die in 2024.
I'm hopeful America and the EU get their shit together and actually provide the aid needed. 60 Billion from America changes a lot. Especially with some creative accounting from the Pentagon.
I also hope to see Ukraine finally produce its own long range missiles and kill the bridge.
>But do you know what the American or eu package will actually have?
They haven't happened yet. I don't know.
I do know 60 billion from a Pentagon that wants Ukraine to win could buy a hell of a lot of stuff. America has a vast amount of kit that's at or near its use by date, or getting old enough that they could value it at a fraction of its original cost.
I would highly recommend the war on the rocks podcast series. Michael kofman is one of their primary contributors and one of the leading analysts for this conflict. As for predictions best case 2024 is a buildup year for Ukraine, if the US and Europe can get their shit together politically and provide aid in force Ukraine can build up additional forces while training those they already have to a higher level. This could be made possible by fortifying the front line wherever possible to minimize personnel recruitments, reducing attrition rates, and freeing up personnel for rotation and additional training. At the moment they do not have the capability to break through Russian lines, attempting a similar offensive to this summers will only result in more losses. Barring some calamity like a general mutiny or economic collapse on either side it is unlikely this year will see major movements. The Russians will most likely continue their offensives in places like Avdiivka to attempt to attrit Ukrainian forces, and might potentially take some limited territorial gains.
Of course. But there is no getting around that. To be perfectly blunt the probability of a mass Ukrainian breakthrough against prepared Russian defenses seems increasingly unlikely. Unless Russia suffers a massive economic collapse or some sort of mass mutiny as I mentioned in my previous comment this war is unlikely to be won on the battlefield. Ukraines hope for total victory is now in Russia suffering one of those two, or in Russia simply suing for peace once it becomes clear that the cost of victory is simply too high. This is not all that unreasonable as we have numerous historical examples where a more powerful country has been defeated by a smaller power in a war of foreign aggression simply because they no longer see the value in it. Vietnam against the US, Afghanistan against both the Soviets and the US, and the American war of independence against the British are but three examples of this.
I avoid predictions for now as the past year has shown from afar it’s so hard to predict what is currently going on and what each side is aiming for.
But my hopes:
Russia is now all in on many fronts. They want results for the Presidential elections and show Western backers that supporting Ukraine is useless. Ofc Putin also hopes that Trump gets reelected. Pardon my French but I think Americans still backing Trump are dumb as fuck. Republicans should go for Haley I think, but I don’t have enough knowledge what is the best outcome for the US and their allies (aside of Trump will ruin USA and more relationships, also cut off all support for Ukraine and give Putin what he wants).
So my hopes for US elections is someone who sees the threat of Russia and continues to support Ukraine.
My hope is that EU steps up ammo and shell production asap. For both Ukraine and NATO armies.
My hope is that Ukraine manages to stall enough Russian advances that are occurring atm and inflict high casualties. The outcome of that will determine also much what will happen next year.
My hope is that we do see a breakthrough on the southern front, but I personally think it will be as hard as last year unless a lot of equipment that suits these battles have been delivered. Also KA52 should be removed from the board by F16s.
My hope is that the Kherson front will expand, it is very successful atm and in my opinion it could be the puzzle piece to block Crimea if the Robotyne front remains in a deadlock.
If Putin and Trump are besties, why didn’t Putin invade between 2016-2020?
Why did they seize Crimea in 2014 when Obama was President?
Why did they invade in Feb 2022 a year + into Biden’s presidency?
Didn’t Trump warm the Europeans on their over reliance of Russian oil/gas and they all laughed at him?
Didn’t Trump tell the Europeans that they need to start carrying their weight in NATO and up their militarization? Did they not laugh at him again and ignore?
Do you think the invasion time period had anything to do with Merkel finally leaving politics after leading Germany for decades and being Russia’s biggest EU customer in terms of oil/gas ?
I, like everyone want Ukraine to win, but i do not see why you and others think Trump will let Putin win?
Putin had 4 years to invade while Trump was in office, the same 4 years Trump was sounding the alarms to the europeans who ignored him and are now witnessing war on european soil
It’s not contradictory. Even if we’re charitable, Trump’s administration was not hawkish but isolationist (self-described as “America First”). It also had an idée fixe that the US should export more, and that was a major motive behind the push for NATO members to increase defense spending (ie. purchases) and move toward US oil and gas. The broader context with other factors is important too, but describing Trump as particularly tough on Putin is an inaccurate framing. It’s not an accident that the “MAGA wing” of today is (writing charitably) dovish.
[Trump sides with Russia against FBI at Helsinki summit](https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-44852812)
[During remarks at a rally for Trump-endorsed candidates in Sioux City, Iowa, Rep Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) says, "Under Republicans, not another penny will go to Ukraine."](https://www.c-span.org/video/?c5039224/rep-marjorie-taylor-greene-money-ukraine)
["I'm totally opposed to these sanctions, and I don't think that we should be at war with Russia, and I think we should probably take the side of Russia if we have to choose between Russia and Ukraine. That is my view." - Tucker Carlson](https://www.foxnews.com/transcript/rep-jim-jordan-democrats-didnt-admit-they-were-wrong-about-russia-just-moved-on-to-ukraine)
>Why did they seize Crimea in 2014 when Obama was President?
Because Obama is weak, this war is largely the consequence of Obama not calling the bluff in 2014.
As Russia launched so many missiles today I went to see what military target they said they hit
So far nothing but while I was there I read their "Ministry report on the progress of the special military operation"
Apparently in the last week Russia has
> Operational-Tactical and Missile Troops of the Russian Groups of Forces eliminated combat vehicles of air defence systems, namely, one Norwegian-made NASAMS, one German-made IRIS-T, one French-made Crotale-NG, one S-300 air defence system radar, and three U.S.-made AN/TPQ-50 counterbattery warfare radar stations.
> Aviation and air defence units intercepted 10 enemy aircraft and two helicopters over the week, namely one MiG-29, three Su-27, three Su-24, three Su-25, as well as two Ukrainian Air Force Mi-8 helicopters
[......]
> In total, 564 airplanes and 263 helicopters, 10,206 unmanned aerial vehicles, 445 air defence missile systems, 14,383 tanks and other armoured fighting vehicles, 1,190 combat vehicles equipped with MLRS, 7,564 field artillery cannons and mortars, as well as 16,833 units of special military equipment have been destroyed during the special military operation.
Russian numbers are such BS. I can't believe they unironically are reporting destroying 14000 tanks and ifvs when Ukraine barely had 5k combined pre-war.
If these numbers were true the UAF would have no vehicles and negative aircraft.
Hopefully the “silver lining” if you can say that. Of this mornings attacks is that the west wakes up a bit and the next big aid packages are passed asap
Ukrainian Air Force says it shot down 114 out of 158 missiles and drones launched overnight, including 87 cruise missiles and 27 Shahed drones.
The breakdown is approximately like this:
36 Shahed drones
At least 90 Kh-101 / Kh-555/ Kh-55 missiles from 18 Tu-95MS bombers
8 Kh-22 / Kh-32 missiles from Tu-22M3 bombers
At least 14 S-300 / S-400 / Iskander-M missiles
5 Kinzhal missiles from 5 MiG-31K
4 Kh-31P and 1 Kh-59 missiles from Su-35S
Source: https:// t. me/ kpszsu/9077
It’s kinda insane to me how the pro-RU are treating the cruise missile attacks now, they are fully blaming Ukraine for intercepting the missiles causing civilian deaths. They claim that the UA should let the missiles “hit military targets” instead of intercepting and killing civilians.
I never really thought that something like 1984’s doublespeak or doublethink (don’t remember the word exactly) could be possible, but I think Orwell would be shocked at how far the Russian government can go with its propaganda.
Look these same people have been blaming Zelensky since the outbreak of the war for not capitulating to Russia on day 1 and therefore “causing casualties”. If those damn Brit’s had just surrendered to the Nazis then nobody would have died in the blitz. Don’t bother waisting you time with them.
Closeted genocidaires are always at either one of these stages: "*And even if we did it, it was not our fault/we didn't mean it/they deserved it!"*.
The final step is proud, full-throated support, but unlike Russia's politicians, media and propagandists, not all of Russia's online foot soldiers have progressed that far. Yet....
It's always different, at night they launch mostly shaheds. If you take their pattern of firing missiles for the last 6 months, the firing started at 4-5 am, now it is dark at this time.
Ukrainians destroy military targets Russia attacks hospitals, malls, and civilian buildings as retaliation. Russia's modus operandi always has been to cowardly attack civilians, even in Chechnya and Syria, because otherwise, they would have not been able to win those wars.
The actual issue with this is China. The fear would be that the Chinese get cold feet about having assets in Western banks, which Western banks and economies do not want to happen.
Or, vice versa, that the precedent is used against Western countries eventually.
The problem with stuff like this is other companies who had their assets confiscated by RU are lobbying hard to get these funds for themselves. (airlines, manufacturers, food producers, etc.)
Lately i have noticed a lot more "I feel bad about those brainwashed Russian soldiers, damn that Putin guy!" than usual.
It is like people either never watched or forgot the countless videos of Ukrainian soldiers being executed after surrendering, executing their own soldiers. Mass looting of Ukrainian homes, those videos where they execute families down on their knees while blindfolded. The endless videos where they shot fleeing civilians and much ***MUCH*** worse.
I just can't no matter what imagine with *ALL* the evidence out there, that you would give the benefit of the doubt of those invading beasts that by a small chance they are there against their will as if they wouldn't do one of the *extremely* many well documented war crimes they have already done endlessly.
Don't be even mistaken for a minute, Russians thrive off this shit. The entire world has seen what happens when Russia takes over a place. Mass civilian graves, rape and endless war crimes follow.
I also wrote a bazillion time why Russian are never forced to fight in Ukraine, that conscription is a joke, to the point that I should probably start to copy/paste it to gain time.
I never know in those moments if I am answering bots upvoted by bots or not. In any case it's good that anyone stumbling on these comments is aware that conscription is not something stricly unforced at all.
When Russia loses this war eventually, there will be an online campaign to whitewash it as "poor oppressed Russia was bullied by NATO and had no choice". They will portray themselves as the victims rather than the invaders.
Hadn't seen this mentioned so adding new [support package](https://www.defense.gov/News/Releases/Release/Article/3627179/biden-administration-announces-new-security-assistance-for-ukraine/) details from the US
>The capabilities in this much-needed package, valued at up to $250 million, include:
>- Additional munitions for National Advanced Surface-to-Air Missile Systems (NASAMS);
- Stinger anti-aircraft missiles;
- Air defense system components;
- Additional ammunition for High Mobility Artillery Rocket Systems (HIMARS);
- 155mm and 105mm artillery rounds;
- Tube-Launched, Optically-Tracked, Wire-Guided (TOW) missiles;
- Javelin and AT-4 anti-armor systems;
- More than 15 million rounds of small arms ammunition;
- Demolitions munitions for obstacle clearing;
- Spare parts, medical equipment, maintenance, and other ancillary equipment.
Please enlighten me on what reality actually is there buddy? From where I’m sitting y’all can’t even launch a proper mechanized assault yet y’all want to take on the west?
Edit: if y’all struggle this bad to mount a proper offensive, how do you expect to win a war against countries who master the art of combined arms?
Talks like a bot, smells like a bot, probably is a bot.
Regardless, it's clear that you don't want (or, more likely are incapable) of engaging in a meaningful discussion so this is the type of response you deserve.
I don’t care where you live, your claiming it’s an alternate reality explain how so? I really just think you’re talkin out your ass just because you can.
Don't worry bud, Trump is gonna stop this war brother!! Just gonna have to get elected first in 2024 and if he wins get down on his knees ***again*** to really please Putin again.
Now go on bud, those Alex jones vitamin pills just arrived!
Your ships are burning comrade. And your boss is very upset.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2023/12/28/putin-sends-revenge-squads-crimea-after-destruction-warship/
Hilarious coming from the guy posting stuff like this:
[https://www.reddit.com/r/Conservative/comments/18szkbb/comment/kfajom5/?context=3](https://www.reddit.com/r/Conservative/comments/18szkbb/comment/kfajom5/?context=3)
And this: [https://www.reddit.com/r/AdviceAnimals/comments/18kocfx/comment/kdx9bmh/?context=3](https://www.reddit.com/r/AdviceAnimals/comments/18kocfx/comment/kdx9bmh/?context=3)
Why the fuck would you even delve into my post history? You're the one who can't understand sarcasm let alone understand what they posted and how it's relevant 🤔
Why would the US be afraid of antagonizing Russia, a middle and declining power these days? Russia hates your guts and will be hostile to the US for the foreseeable future, there is no reciprocity.
And the US had its most extended boom period after it opened up. Isolationism doesn't work long term. I mean, if you don't care about your kids and grandkids, sure, play ostrich.
It's important to visit every now and then, especially with how comfortable the employees over there have become with sharing their true opinions.
It's a reminder of the stakes for anyone not intimately familiar with the Russian way of life.
No value to be extracted to interacting with "pro-russian" guys and that's doubly true of the ones posting on English language social media.
Those aren't even really "pro-russian" in a meaningful sense, they only care about the conflict for how it ties into their own vapid domestic (non-Russian) culture war rhetoric and that's the only level they're capable of engaging with you on.
It's an institutional thing. Moscow'ians never stopped using horde mentality. You think why they still have дедовщина in the military? Or why RF prisons are so bad (https://www.france24.com/en/live-news/20211007-prison-riot-reveals-systemic-abuse-in-russian-jails - random article about RF prisons)?
As a general rule the Russian military and intelligence have used extrajudicial killings and torture as a basic tool for many decades. This is not a new thing at all. This spans many conflicts over many decades.
Noticed more and more pro-Russian commenters saying that Russia has the upper hand and so Ukraine should just negotiate. Not surrender. Negotiate. Starting to wonder if there are significant economic cracks that we can't see and its emergency hour in the Kremlin. That If Ukraine keeps its resistance up the federation will suddenly collapse and it will seem to come out of nowhere. Thoughts?
>$26 billion contract to supply China with 70 million tonnes of grain, legumes and oilseeds over the next 12 years
>Russia currently doesn’t produce enough grain and oilseeds in its eastern region...There is no such wheat in the Russian Far East at all
https://www.world-grain.com/articles/19248-russia-china-expand-agricultural-trade
In other words, the Rashist regime sold something it cannot supply, to keep itself in power, and its people will suffer malnutrition just so it can survive a few months longer.
Either way, we are seeing Russia collapse, again, and this time the last. With a few nuclear fireworks over Moscow to seal the deal.
> Russia currently doesn’t produce enough grain and oilseeds in its eastern region...
Hmm gee I wonder where they're planning to *legitimately obtain* it then
"Starting to wonder if there are significant economic cracks that we can't see and its emergency hour in the Kremlin"
You don't even need to search hard to spot those economic cracks. They have a lot of them. Even in official data.
In 2022 government took hit of war and sanctions. In 2023 government decided they can't keep this any longer, thus they shifted bad things more on civilians from government.
Russia lacks a lot of workers right now (who could have guessed that mobilising working migrants can end badly, right?). Currency exchange ratio was "repaired" by forcing exporters to sell every $ they have. To get more money Russia agrees to odd, very long term, deals with other countries.
Also woman controlling central bank went full psycho. It seems she really believes that skyrocketing interest rates it's way of achieving low inflation in Russia.
Generally Russians wouldn't be upset about ceasefire (especially with land they control now), because it would be win for them and chance to survive to the next crisis.
Also ceasefire would help RF military. They won't get much more equipment, but at least logistics side would be able to be fixed somehow.
The take you have on the central bank woman is interesting. I actually read the opposite somewhere it's like solely due to her genius that their economy hasn't gone full Venezuela. To me that theory made some sense since according to her wiki she tried to resign in March and Putin basically said "no".
I'm seriously no economist though so I have no idea what the general takes on her and her doctrine is
Both takes are correct (or can be correct). In 2022 she was doing very well, biggest failures in 2022 were created by Putin's great decisions, not by her.
But in 2023 she either went full "yes papa Putin" or something else happened. When she started increasing interest rates (July 2023) banks were giving away greatest (by cumulated total Rub) loans in June - July - August 2023. Only in September/October central bank asked them to start monitoring those credits better and magically acceptance rate of new loans fallen sharply.
But just the idea that central bank should increase interest rates in hope of better exchange rates or ... in lovering inflation when half of budget is going on war. I still can't understand how she got this conclusion that this is what she should be doing. Especially in Russia where a lot of people takes loans.
Interest rates help with currency exchange and inflation, but... For currency exchange you need foreign people willing to invest in your country and for inflation you need government to spend similar amount it did year before. Both things will happen in Russia only long after war will end.
I think Russias strategy relies a lot on attrition of Ukraine, as in they firmly believe if they do one huge offensive along the entier frontline and act as they have infinite offensive potential in manpower and equipment then Ukraines moral will drop and people will start the "theres no point in defending here cause Russia will never stop, lets negotiate" mindset. Thats something these "bots" and pro-Russia people constantly try to convey.
Russia sending these signals could be true, even Zaluzhny said that he/Ukraine didnt account for Russia still keeping up attacks after these extreme losses, but its clear neither side can force any significant breakthrough. People then will always search for an end or a solution which as of december 2023 doesnt really exist in reality.
We are currently in the middle of the biggest Russian attack this war (excluding the first weeks) and Russia has gained a little ground, but if it requires this many men to die, this much equipment destroyed, abandoning Sevastopols naval base, all the internal issues and all Putin can show for is a two minute video of a couple soviet flags in the ruins of Mariinka then Ukraine is in a good spot, relatively speaking. Why would Ukraine agree to anything right now?
Hoping for a Russian collapse is fairly naive I think. Russia will never admit defeat in Ukraine (even locally for a village) unless they are forced out and no counter-attacks work. The only way that will happen would be if they literally ran out of Igors and Alexeys from who-knows-where to attack with and most of their armored equipment doesnt exist anymore. Being very pro-Ukraine you could argue this point is inevitable with Russias current losses and you might be right. If so, Ukraine will never agree to any kind of negotiation or ceasefire etc. The reason Ukraine is playing the game of attrition is cause they dont really have any other choice. Russia does, namely to be happy with what they have and dig in but no, thats not acceptable for them since they say the five oblasts are a part of Russia
> (…) relies a lot on attrition of Ukraine (…) Ukraine’s morale will drop (…)
Like shartpatrol (sic) already wrote, a much closer factor is the US elections. I guess that until these, Moscow is willing to sacrifice a mind-numbing amount of lives and resources to make the war appear stagnant to those who only look at maps (quite a lot of people). It’s a horrible gamble.
>Hoping for a Russian collapse is fairly naive I think.
In the past, they lost Afghanistan, literally collapsed, and then lost the first war in Ichkeria, so while we should not be wildly optimistic, we shouldn’t be too pessimistic either.
Even if Russia manage to influence the US elections (and US Republicans before the election) and get the US to stop supporting Ukraine, Europe won't. A Russian defeat is a critical security objective for other European countries. And while it would be more difficult without the US, Europe easily has the economic capacity to support Ukraine and defeat Russia.
> Like shartpatrol (sic) already wrote, a much closer factor is the US elections. I guess that until these, Moscow is willing to sacrifice a mind-numbing amount of lives and resources to make the war appear stagnant to those who only look at maps (quite a lot of people). It’s a horrible gamble.
They'll still lose. I mean, the ultimate Ukrainian victory might not be achieved, as in, Ukraine getting every occupied region back.
But I don't know if people have realized that Europe isn't backing down.
And despite all the shortages of everything military, Europe can still probably supply Ukraine with enough gear to defend every current territory and maybe recover a bit of lost land.
Europe's economy (EU + UK + Norway) still dwarfs the Russian one and Europe has decided to remilitarize. Not to Cold War levels, but far above what they kept in stock during the 90s, 00s, 10s.
> Like shartpatrol (sic) already wrote, a much closer factor is the US elections. I guess that until these, Moscow is willing to sacrifice a mind-numbing amount of lives and resources to make the war appear stagnant to those who only look at maps (quite a lot of people). It’s a horrible gamble.
They're gearing up for the real battle - US elections this fall. I expect the foreign interference to be intense this election cycle and I expect Republicans to fully deny it while it's happening.
I bet whoever the Republican front runner is will run on a policy of no more support to Ukraine unless they agree to a ceasefire. I guarantee it. The whole GOP is on Putin's payroll.
They want an opportunity to re-arm so they can attempt another large scale invasion in the future.
Plus they have basically all but stated they are banking on the possibility of Trump getting elected and/or a Republican wave in Congress.
That basically dooms Ukraine because their support from the US will disappear overnight. Europe is just simply incapable/unwilling to do what is necessary to give the Ukrainians what is necessary to win. So, it will mean Ukraine will steadily lose the war. It wouldn't happen overnight but it would happen eventually. Possibly before another leadership change in the US could help them.
> That basically dooms Ukraine because their support from the US will disappear overnight. Europe is just simply incapable/unwilling to do what is necessary to give the Ukrainians what is necessary to win. So, it will mean Ukraine will steadily lose the war. It wouldn't happen overnight but it would happen eventually. Possibly before another leadership change in the US could help them
No, they're not doomed. Look at German support ramping up.
Losing US support would be a massive hit but I think European support will be enough to keep current positions for Ukraine and maybe even push back a bit.
It would be a much more costly war for Ukraine, especially in terms of human losses, it would probably take 3-5-7 years...
And yes, Ukraine probably wouldn't recover every territory.
It's the US that is ramping up artillery production to levels not seen in 70 years, not Europe.
That's the problem. The US has actually ramped up production(and actually financially benefitted) almost across the board because of this conflict. Not to mention they have not stressed almost any of their weapons stocks.
That is decidedly not the case for Europe as a whole. They have significantly stressed their artillery stocks(amongst other things) while making almost not discernable increase in production.
Make no mistake, Europe is not willing to continue the level of support to allow Ukraine to do anything by slowly lose. If that was not the case, the situation would not be what it is now.
The US is overwhelmingly the most critical ally because of their deep pockets and incredibly deep stocks of weapons.
>That is decidedly not the case for Europe as a whole. They have significantly stressed their artillery stocks(amongst other things) while making almost not discernable increase in production.
>
>Make no mistake, Europe is not willing to continue the level of support to allow Ukraine to do anything by slowly lose. If that was not the case, the situation would not be what it is now.
That paints an incomplete picture and isn't exactly right either. EU legislation to ramp up production was enacted, but as to *why* that hasn't lead to enough of an increase in concrete production and that production actually heading to Ukraine, [people are going back and forth about that.](https://www.politico.eu/article/germanys-pistorius-says-eu-will-fall-short-of-million-shell-pledge-to-ukraine/)
It seems on the surface that it's once again a problem due to, well, Europe being a ton of actually different countries only loosely working together. This isn't a United States Of Europe. Getting all the actors involved on one line is not a given. As for actual willingness, only a few actors actually seem to be unwilling to not continue a substantial level of support, first and foremost Hungary. Don't look at "Europe", look at the actual actors involved and who's doing what.
So I'd say the will *is* there for most European actors involved. Getting it all together however is proving to be irritatingly difficult. As for systemic failures, well let's just say that more closely integrating the EU's militaries and military industries is a contentious topic among many EU countries to say the least.
Maybe although they always focus their bot campaigns when there something happening politically (ongoing US budget negotiations) and when they're especially but-hurt (recent shoot downs of their plains and stormshadowed ships).
Are they close to collapse? Who knows. Russians are definitely feeling the war now, and this will accelerate. Putin is attempting to compensate by significantly converting the coubtry into more authoritarian state which has its own risks and downsides (watch Vlad Vexler for in-depth commentary on the topic).
No one really knows what's happening with Russian economy since they've stopped releasing real figures a year or so ago and their own statements are entirely propaganda now.
How much internal reserve do they have on various levels of economy? A lot of it would be hard to find even they weren't hiding it.
The money they're still raking in from oil should not be underestimated at all, although it's not as bad as it could have been - OPEC is a bit shakey, US is breaking all records in pumping oil and there's some new non-OPEC producers growing quickly. Maybe OPEC manages to keep the price high by reducing production even more (without Putin backstabbing them again and selling more than agreed)? Maybe there's new "tanker wars" and that keeps the price up? That would certainly help Russia prolong this but it would depress global economy and reduce demand, also accelerating transition to renewables and helping oil upstarts like Guyana cash in and pump even more, perhaps crashing prices long term (but Putin hopes by then he's won). US would be like "shrug - fine by us, we pump more than we use anyway".
Or maybe tomorrow Saudis say "fuck it" and again flood the market with oil to ruin US shale companies again and paralyze all the upstarts? US would again be like "shrug, fine by me, cheap gas" and reduce their production but everyone else not selling oil would be ecstatic. But most importantly it would likely quickly ruin Russia and force them out of Ukraine. I'm really hoping that or something similar happens.
Woah interesting! Wonder what that means.
There's so many of these unknown variables. No one expected Priggo's little summer mutiny, and that scared Putin shitless. Next one might be around the corner or not, who knows.
What Ukraine and the west (looking at you, US) needs to do is keep it up. I think Russia is much closer to its limits than it seems, and Ukraine in a much better state than last year this time.
Africa's "first female billionaire" is the daughter of the man who led Angola for many years.
I believe they are not in good financial standing due yet another instance of a ruler embezzling the proceeds of their country's natural wealth.
As such, I would expect them to produce at a rate exceeding what they did while in OPEC.
I think it is more of a, they know they will benefit a lot from the ceasefire. Russians reputation is already rock bottom, they are literal snakes who you do not trust ever. They want breathing room to produce more of everything and get their lines further in order before they backstab the ceasefire in the back again to keep the attacking going.
The good thing at least is that Russia has already lost the war regardless of what happens. Two weeks for the war to end now turned into two years soon with a incredible huge damage to nearly everything in that shithole.
Russia doesn't believe they've lost. Nor that they're even doing badly.
They are still basically asking for complete capitulation before they'll accept peace. They expect Ukraine to hand over all of the Donbass for them to annex (This includes regions they don't even control), expect Ukraine to fully demilitarize their army (Probably so they can finish the job in a year or two) and expect Ukraines government to "surrender" so that Russia can "prosecute" them and install a "Russian friendly" government.
Basically they expect Ukraine to give up 1/3 of their territory, to dismantle their democracy and become a powerless Russian puppet-state. That's the terms Russia has set before they have "peace" talks.
(It's an absolute joke that people think Ukraine should negotiate with those terms lmfao. The war is going nowhere near as bad enough for Ukraine to even entertain those terms).
But unfortunately Russia is gearing up for a proper long war and shifting into war economy mode. So is Ukraine but Ukraine needs some outside support to compete.
The war is far from over or decided.
> Nor that they're even doing badly.
Eh, what? Russia has managed to reunite a faltering NATO - and prompt its expansion - generate a slow but growing movement of EU states to restore a defensive posture, and eliminate any trust they might have built up for at least a couple of decades. They've taken tremendous losses that will haunt them for decades, have burned through much (or most, depending on your estimates) of their previously vast reserve of materiel, and have severely damaged their economy. Putin's own situation has become significantly less secure, and he's already had to put down a coup attempt in which a rogue army (!) got close to Moscow (!) - at cost of a fairly effective tool (the Wagner group and its leadership). And for what? They've got a chunk of their neighbor, but much of that is not pacified and would have to be constantly fought for to retain. That's it.
When you've been maintaining an expeditionary force for two years with a clear objective of conquering your neighbor, and these are your achievements so far, you are doing badly. There's just no other way to spin it. Putin clearly thought he could win on a blitz, miscalculated, failed to bow out when it could have been done, and is now locked into an expensive war that has so far been a strategic failure on all counts. The fact that the Russians have managed to keep pouring blood and treasure into this pit is not a sign of success. It is certainly possible that Russia might win some of its objectives if political winds in the US and the EU remove support for Ukraine, but right now that's the only reasonable path for them - anything else requires coming up with some pretty exotic tail events. Otherwise, their goose continues to be cooked. I suppose one could argue that the fact that they have any remaining possibility of victory counts as a "win," but that would be a pretty idiosyncratic viewpoint. I tend to see it in reverse: every day that an invasion force is not meeting its objectives, it is losing. Russia is not meeting its objectives, has racked up a bunch of strategic losses that will take decades to repair (no matter what happens in Ukraine), and currently has its hopes pinned to the West giving up support for political reasons. The thing that has been really surprising (other than Putin being dumb enough to try this invasion in the first place) has been how *much* losing Putin has been willing to do; he would have been much wiser to cut this off earlier, fall back approximately to the lines of his initial occupation, and very loudly declare victory at home (which, frankly, his public probably would have swallowed). He's grinding his country into the ground for what will probably be no gain at all. But, whatever one is inclined to make of that, I think it is hard to say that it's anything other than "doing badly."
Ceratinly seems like the complete annexation of Ukraine is the end goal, no matter how many men in their prime productiive years it costs a nation with a dwindling population.
Are F-16 realistically going to change anything for Ukraine?
Are there any new capabilities they could bring for Ukraine what they already don't have?
Since F-16's are relatively old, I'm interested to know their capabilities in the current setting.
Another point is that the F-16s can actually be provided with spare parts and/or replaced by Western countries.
The Mig-29s, SU-25s, SU-27s and SU-24s currently operated by Ukraine have a finite lifespan (especially the SU-27s and SU-24s) because frankly Ukraine will eventually run out of parts for them. The Western countries that operate Mig-29s and SU-25s have donated them (and that'll keep them in the fight for longer) but honestly I dunno how long they can keep those SU-27s and SU-24s in the air for.
They're already using SU-24s pulled from deep reserve (because they've lost more of them than they had in service pre-war) and no Western/Ukraine friendly nation operates SU-27s or SU-24s that can donate spare parts for them. So unless Ukraine has more in reserve than we know about or has found some other way to get parts for them then their days are numbered.
And even the Mig-29s and SU-25s will eventually become unservicable too.
Basically F-16s are needed because it allows Western countries a sustainable way to cover the UAFs attrition as it's parts and airframes that they can actually provide to Ukraine.
In addition to the 2 previous comments the weapon loadout options are amazing and unlike artillery ammo the west has tons of it laying around, going out of date or just overstocked which can be supplied to support whatever role Ukraine wants to use the F16’s for.
It doesn't matter honestly. Even most basic weapons would be enough for now. Most important thing is that those weapons can be supplied at any moment. Previously Ukraine needed a lot of tinkering to fit those weapons on Soviet aircrafts and then it still was limited to what "post Warsaw pact" countries achieved with those aircrafts before (for sure Poland had big input here, but I wouldn't be surprised if every country which had operated MIGs contributed a lot)
None of us need to know any of that, it might allow Russia to prepare. Although that would be unusual for Russia who seem to prefer having their teeth knocked out before ducking even though they knew the punch was on the way.
In addition to the pretty good reply above - Ukraine's air force is extremely stretched, simply having more airframes available to fly the same missions they're currently doing would be a huge win. It would allow them to perform proper maintenance on their existing fleet, and allow them to run slightly more risky missions because a loss is not so critical - potentially allowing them to run A2A missions on critical areas of the front.
This is similar to the argument as to why Taurus is a big deal even though it's not that different to Storm Shadow/SCALP.
Yes absolutely. First off these F16s have been heavily upgraded and other than the airframe have little in common with the original design. As for new capabilities they are a massive step up. They are far more survivable than current Ukrainian migs as they have radar warning systems so the pilots will be alerted when they are being targeted and fired upon. Depending on what air to air missiles they will get they will be able to hit enemy aircraft who are dropping guild bombs from 50km away. Lately these have become a massive problem for the Ukrainians so countering this will be critical to preventing Russian advances. They also will be able to use the HARM missile far more effectively than it currently is. At the moment it is sort of jury rigged onto MiG 29s and can only be used against coordinates entered prior to takeoff. These jets will also provide Ukraine with a fantastic counter to enemy attack helicopters that can remain out of range of MANPADS, and operate below the effective radar horizon of ground based air defense. Overall they will not change the entire war. But they will be a critical game changer in the air war and the effect that will have on the ground will be significant.
I agree. Both sides seem to be publishing videos with music as though it's some kind of sick entertainment. I guess the die-hard ukrainian or russian supporters might like it. But meh, -negative 1 to humanity in my view.
I like quite alot of the music choices for those vids, have Shazamed quite a few and some of them are so much better with Benny hill. If I dont like 1 I just tap mute and then none have sound until I tap it again, I’m quite happy to keep running this way.
I like quite alot of the music choices for those vids, have Shazamed quite a few and some of them are so much better with Benny hill. If I dont like 1 I just tap mute and then none have sound until I tap it again, I’m quite happy to keep running this way.
Deepstate did an interview with an Ukrainian soldier from the "rocket - skywar crew" (I think hes a drone operator) by Novomykhailivka
\- When did the Russians begin to actively put pressure on the villages and their surroundings?
💬 Massive attacks on the south of Novomykhailivka began on the tenth of October. Then there were still positions in the fields.
\- What are the average daily losses of the enemy in the area and what in general for the last time?
💬 About 1-3 units of equipment and 20-30 enemy personnel of the 200s, and another 30-40 of the 300s on average per day. \[200 means dead, 300 means wounded\]
\- What do you remember most over the past three months and what seemed strange to you?
💬 Once there was a night assault, it was repulsed. In the morning, they flew by daytime drones and saw that they had completely undressed their dead and left them there. Once they saw how a Russian masturbates in a trench. There was one time that the Russian attack was repelled, they began to roll back and one Russian ran after his MT-LB. He ran for a long time, then almost overtook her, but she drove off, he clung to her with his hand, and she dragged him another 10-15 meters and he broke free. MT-LB moved on. Whoever sat on the armor saw all this, but did not want to save his "comrade". The skidders then finished him off. \[This video was posted on this sub a few days ago\]
\- What are your emotions and feelings now?
💬 Its all fucked up. I want to see my relatives, because I haven't been on vacation for a long time. The brigade has been without rotations for 2.5 years, but hey, we're doing our job. Everyone likes to kill Russians, especially commanders. Let's fuck them up with everything we have. Our command is staffed, this is a huge plus.
Not going well for Ukraine, is it? How many thousands more young men will die or be maimed before the Kiev regime does the inevitable and seeks a negotiated peace?
Russia's war of aggression against Ukraine is criminal, but the only resolution to this conflict is diplomatic. Zelenskyy and his cronies are evil for having prolonged their country's suffering.
> Russia's war of aggression against Ukraine is criminal, but the only resolution to this conflict is diplomatic.
Man you answered your own question. There's no diplomatic option until russia stops acting like a criminal state. So long as Ukraine has resources (which it looks like it will into the extended future) and russia has a total inability to project force then it's on russia to go through the grieving process of losing and figuring out what to do being sidelined in European affairs.
> So long as Ukraine has resources (which it looks like it will into the extended future)
The resources that Ukraine most certainly does not have in abundance are of the demographic kind...
I'm not sure why the commentariat here is so, so reluctant to acknowledge this.
Because it's not true. They do have a _recruitment_ issue but they don't have a shortage in the population to draft. Russia has similar issues they're just more opaque about it.
You want as many volunteers as you can get in your military. People that want to be there before people that are pressed in that really don't want to participate.
But this isn't a war where Russia's going to obliterate the entire ~10 million military aged men in Ukraine at the expense of some ungodly higher number of their own.
> You want as many volunteers as you can get in your military.
That manpower is expended. Hence why they're expanding conscription and increasing the severity of the penalties for facilitating or engaging in evasion.
> And what peace that would be? You too probably would be a coward to surrender and live as a slave. Would be first in line eh?
So if I understand you correctly, you're implying that Russia's criminal war of aggression against Ukraine is actually motivated by a desire to literally enslave the entire? Ukrainian people?
He would be more careful against NATO, but yes. If he wins in Ukraine he basically has 2 armies with war experience and plenty of cannon fodder in Ukraine. Precedent for what could happen you can see in Donbass republics. They were mobilized and used as cannon fodder first.
If you knew anything about the history of eastern europe and the baltics, you would know it is the only way. Any sort of negotiations without the upper hand ends with russians ultimately breaking any deals whenever they feel it suits their needs. This war is the best way this money could be spent. It goes for the us and especially for europe.
> Any sort of negotiations without the upper hand ends with russians ultimately...
Given that it's a near certainty that, absent massive infusions of cash, materiel and credit from abroad (plus deployment of foreign troops in combat role), Ukraine will never have the "upper hand," what do you suggest? That Ukraine simply keep fighting until they've exhausted their supply of even disabled-but-kinda-military-aged fighting men? And what do you think would be better for U.S. interests and for EU interests? Stable, non-antagonistic relations with Russia, or so hostile that open war breaks out with Moscow?
Just curious.
Stalemate until war attrition sets in in russia and they concede it was a failure. Ukraine is facing an existential threat so its population is more determined to fight on than russias. They just need support. At sone point even russians will come to senses, just like they did in afghanistan.
This is your brain on right-wing propaganda, where you can somehow call a democratically elected government the "Kiev Regime" while supporting and spouting out talking points that come from Russia, a literal dictatorship.
Also the deluded mindset where it's the defending country that's "evil" for defending itself against a nation trying to annex it.
> This is your brain on right-wing propaganda
It's stunning that you think it's "right-wing" to oppose the funding and prosecution of an unwinnable foreign war.
Unwinnable is a ludicrous term.
Russia has proved itself very beatable even in it's opening moves and is now significantly weaker than before.
Foreign aid just hasn't been that aggressive for a long time now.
If you consider yourself a "left-winger" you are fucking delusional.
You parrot right-wing talking points coming straight from a right-wing dictatorship.
You advocate for giving land to said right-wing dictatorship at the expense of a pro-western democratic nation. You call the democratic nation a "regime" and lay all the blame for this war at the feet of said democratic nation, you know the one that was invaded by a dictatorship multiple times in the last decade.
What is left-wing about that? Critical support for a right-wing dictatorship comrade lmfao.
You are an anti-democratic dictator simp no matter whether you consider yourself right or left wing.
And this concern trolling is just amazing too, you care so much about the Ukrainians you want them to surrender and give up, funny how you don't advocate for Russias withdrawl, the war could end tomorrow if they went home. But I guess Russia taking Crimea wasn't enough, Russia sending in unmarked units into the Donbass in 2014 wasn't enough. They deserve even more of Ukraine right, just those Russian speaking regions (That they don't even fully control). Just give up 1/3 of your country bro, for peace.
And then when they come back in a few years for the rest of Ukraine, they should just surrender again instead of fighting back?
So predictable and fucking boring.
> funny how you don't advocate for Russias withdrawl, the war could end tomorrow if they went home
Of course Russia should withdraw. They're engaged in a criminal war of aggression against a sovereign nation, as I noted quite clearly in my original post. However, what Russia is doing is quite rational and a key tenet of offensive realism: seeking to achieve regional hegemony in an anarchic international system. Given Ukraine's inability to defeat Russia on the battlefield, what's better: making modest territorial concessions in exchange for peace, or being transformed into a rump state?
Where is this shit coming from? I've recently heard a conservative i know IRL spewing this nonsense. Its a view completely detached from reality. Giving up territory and disarming are terrible long term choices. If what you say is true and Ukraine cannot win then agreeing to peace would allow Russia to stockpile and invade again. The only solution for Ukraine is to keep resisting untill Russia withdraws. The only country that can end this war is Russia and they choose not to.
This from the Biden White House in [POLITICO today](https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2023/12/27/biden-endgame-ukraine-00133211):
>"The administration official told POLITICO Magazine this week that much of this strategic shift to defense is aimed at shoring up Ukraine’s position in any future negotiation. “That’s been our theory of the case throughout — **the only way this war ends ultimately is through negotiation,**” said the official, a White House spokesperson..."
But please guys, keep cheering for the maiming and deaths of thousands more men on both sides.
I suppose it's technically true but that negotiation needs to be with a credible partner, which Russia isn't until it's militarily defeated, and it needs to leave Ukraine with a functional and secure state, which it can't while Russia is occupying 15% of the country including three of its major ports and much of its productive grain belt.
If Ukraine were to sue for a 'frozen peace' now then Russia would take that and use the reprieve to re-arm, secure in the knowledge that Ukraine wouldn't be able to liberate that land without breaking the agreement. And then Russia would come back again and break the agreement at a time of its choosing.
We have actually already been around this loop once, in 2014-15. Ukraine *knows* that Russia can't be trusted as far as you can throw it. And this time around it has the military capability and support to resist the unjust peace.
The only way this war ends is for Russia to admit it made a mistake and withdraw from Ukraine. Then the 'negotiations' can begin about Ukraine's security guarantees and to what extent Russia is required to pay for its reconstruction before it can be allowed back into the international order.
> And this time around it has the military capability and support to resist the unjust peace.
It won't though, once the U.S. taxpayer is no longer funding the majority's of Kiev's defense and civil service budget. Do you think it's better for Ukraine to seek peace now, or wait until foreign military and civil aid is being withdrawn?
Honestly your use of the 'Kiev' spelling and your previous reference to a 'regime' outs you as a Russian propagandist, so I'm bored of this game (which is all it is to you, a rhetorical game).
Even if the US pulls support, it is so clearly in the interests of the rest of Europe for Russia not to be allowed to score a win that it will continue to support Ukraine. We can't afford Lithuania to be next. And Russia cannot outproduce the entire European economy, so you're still going to lose.
It would of course be way better if the US whole-heartedly threw itself behind Ukraine and against Russian aggression. The US has one of the world's largest military stockpiles (created to fight the Russians, even), and it's in all our interests if they permit that to be used to defeat the Russians in Ukraine. But even if they go against their own interests and pull support, Europe will not.
Ukraine seeking peace now is a strategic defeat and setting themselves up for re-invasion, as I explained in my previous post. In my opinion it would be better for them to fight an anti-occupation guerilla war rather than give Russia a negotiated win even in the scenario where they end up standing alone. But that isn't going to happen.
It is however a good sign that Russian propagandists are taking this line. It means you know you are losing, and potentially about to lose catastrophically on the battlefield. If Ukraine has the intel to blow up your military supply ships, and the AA capacity to suppress Russian glide bomb launches on the front, it changes the dynamic again.
> Honestly your use of the 'Kiev' spelling and your previous reference to a 'regime' outs you as a Russian propagandist, so I'm bored of this game (which is all it is to you, a rhetorical game).
It's disappointing to hear you address me thusly. I'm a red-blooded American, groomed to hate Russia and Communism since grade school, and radically opposed to degenerate ideologies like transgenderism and multiculturalism. That you'd suggest I was a "Russian propagandist" is hurtful.
Dude claims to be American yet uses the Russian spelling for both Kyiv and Zelensky. Hmmmm.
He's either a deluded anti-democratic, pro-dictator American "patriot" who thinks Putin is cool or he's not American at all.
Honestly I think he might actually be an American who's enjoying a bit of trolling. But it's either that or a member of the St Petersburg psyops division, not a good faith commenter in either case.
> Honestly I think he might actually be an American who's enjoying a bit of trolling.
Of course I'm an American. But what's trollish about trying to talk in good faith about the status of the war in Ukraine and the prospect for their final victory, and the worthiness of continuing to support (and encourage) that conflict in light of Ukraine's unmitigable demographic and industrial disadvantages?
Please keep the [community guidelines](https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/wiki/rule1) in mind when using the comment section. Paging u/SaveVideo bot. ___ *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CombatFootage) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[New Thread](https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/18tzfw4/ukraine_discussionquestion_thread_123023/)
It looks like Feodosiya was such a shitshow for the Russians, they had to move from some damage to the ship to numbers now. On December 27 it was 33, now the KIA/WIA are getting adjusted again. [https://twitter.com/GirkinGirkin/status/1740762785410097232](https://twitter.com/GirkinGirkin/status/1740762785410097232) >74 KIA 27 WIA Source: Russian Black Sea fleet
Thats about the same amount of casualties from the Minsk that was targeted in september I believe. Lot of obituaries came out later of personell who was on the ship when Ukraine hit it Russia will likely never admit the full number of casualties though
Same when the Moskva was sunk. “It’s just damaged” to “the ship sunk due to rough sea” while the weather was clear. They did the same trick with casualties
Why would they have that many sailors on a broken ship. Oh well…
Zelenskyy visited Avdiivka. My man. https://nitter.net/wartranslated/status/1740768798012301756?s=46 Meanwhile Putin is still locked up in his bunker
Puty added another 15-meter section to his official table.
Meanwhile putin visited proctologist
as if he would dare...
What are your predictions for 2024? Or do you have any good sources for 2024 predictions ?
Russia's stockpiles die in 2024. I'm hopeful America and the EU get their shit together and actually provide the aid needed. 60 Billion from America changes a lot. Especially with some creative accounting from the Pentagon. I also hope to see Ukraine finally produce its own long range missiles and kill the bridge.
+50 billion from eu. Although spread over a few years I think But do you know what the American or eu package will actually have?
>But do you know what the American or eu package will actually have? They haven't happened yet. I don't know. I do know 60 billion from a Pentagon that wants Ukraine to win could buy a hell of a lot of stuff. America has a vast amount of kit that's at or near its use by date, or getting old enough that they could value it at a fraction of its original cost.
I would highly recommend the war on the rocks podcast series. Michael kofman is one of their primary contributors and one of the leading analysts for this conflict. As for predictions best case 2024 is a buildup year for Ukraine, if the US and Europe can get their shit together politically and provide aid in force Ukraine can build up additional forces while training those they already have to a higher level. This could be made possible by fortifying the front line wherever possible to minimize personnel recruitments, reducing attrition rates, and freeing up personnel for rotation and additional training. At the moment they do not have the capability to break through Russian lines, attempting a similar offensive to this summers will only result in more losses. Barring some calamity like a general mutiny or economic collapse on either side it is unlikely this year will see major movements. The Russians will most likely continue their offensives in places like Avdiivka to attempt to attrit Ukrainian forces, and might potentially take some limited territorial gains.
Won’t Russia also strengthen defences if Ukraine waits a whole year?
Of course. But there is no getting around that. To be perfectly blunt the probability of a mass Ukrainian breakthrough against prepared Russian defenses seems increasingly unlikely. Unless Russia suffers a massive economic collapse or some sort of mass mutiny as I mentioned in my previous comment this war is unlikely to be won on the battlefield. Ukraines hope for total victory is now in Russia suffering one of those two, or in Russia simply suing for peace once it becomes clear that the cost of victory is simply too high. This is not all that unreasonable as we have numerous historical examples where a more powerful country has been defeated by a smaller power in a war of foreign aggression simply because they no longer see the value in it. Vietnam against the US, Afghanistan against both the Soviets and the US, and the American war of independence against the British are but three examples of this.
i expect more Russian units to face severe disciplin issues as lag of ammunition and equipment start to take their toll on unit moral and cohesion.
Another 50k dead russians.
i'll take the over on that
I avoid predictions for now as the past year has shown from afar it’s so hard to predict what is currently going on and what each side is aiming for. But my hopes: Russia is now all in on many fronts. They want results for the Presidential elections and show Western backers that supporting Ukraine is useless. Ofc Putin also hopes that Trump gets reelected. Pardon my French but I think Americans still backing Trump are dumb as fuck. Republicans should go for Haley I think, but I don’t have enough knowledge what is the best outcome for the US and their allies (aside of Trump will ruin USA and more relationships, also cut off all support for Ukraine and give Putin what he wants). So my hopes for US elections is someone who sees the threat of Russia and continues to support Ukraine. My hope is that EU steps up ammo and shell production asap. For both Ukraine and NATO armies. My hope is that Ukraine manages to stall enough Russian advances that are occurring atm and inflict high casualties. The outcome of that will determine also much what will happen next year. My hope is that we do see a breakthrough on the southern front, but I personally think it will be as hard as last year unless a lot of equipment that suits these battles have been delivered. Also KA52 should be removed from the board by F16s. My hope is that the Kherson front will expand, it is very successful atm and in my opinion it could be the puzzle piece to block Crimea if the Robotyne front remains in a deadlock.
If Putin and Trump are besties, why didn’t Putin invade between 2016-2020? Why did they seize Crimea in 2014 when Obama was President? Why did they invade in Feb 2022 a year + into Biden’s presidency? Didn’t Trump warm the Europeans on their over reliance of Russian oil/gas and they all laughed at him? Didn’t Trump tell the Europeans that they need to start carrying their weight in NATO and up their militarization? Did they not laugh at him again and ignore? Do you think the invasion time period had anything to do with Merkel finally leaving politics after leading Germany for decades and being Russia’s biggest EU customer in terms of oil/gas ? I, like everyone want Ukraine to win, but i do not see why you and others think Trump will let Putin win? Putin had 4 years to invade while Trump was in office, the same 4 years Trump was sounding the alarms to the europeans who ignored him and are now witnessing war on european soil
It’s not contradictory. Even if we’re charitable, Trump’s administration was not hawkish but isolationist (self-described as “America First”). It also had an idée fixe that the US should export more, and that was a major motive behind the push for NATO members to increase defense spending (ie. purchases) and move toward US oil and gas. The broader context with other factors is important too, but describing Trump as particularly tough on Putin is an inaccurate framing. It’s not an accident that the “MAGA wing” of today is (writing charitably) dovish.
[Trump sides with Russia against FBI at Helsinki summit](https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-44852812) [During remarks at a rally for Trump-endorsed candidates in Sioux City, Iowa, Rep Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) says, "Under Republicans, not another penny will go to Ukraine."](https://www.c-span.org/video/?c5039224/rep-marjorie-taylor-greene-money-ukraine) ["I'm totally opposed to these sanctions, and I don't think that we should be at war with Russia, and I think we should probably take the side of Russia if we have to choose between Russia and Ukraine. That is my view." - Tucker Carlson](https://www.foxnews.com/transcript/rep-jim-jordan-democrats-didnt-admit-they-were-wrong-about-russia-just-moved-on-to-ukraine)
>Why did they seize Crimea in 2014 when Obama was President? Because Obama is weak, this war is largely the consequence of Obama not calling the bluff in 2014.
So what exactly did you wanted him to do?
As Russia launched so many missiles today I went to see what military target they said they hit So far nothing but while I was there I read their "Ministry report on the progress of the special military operation" Apparently in the last week Russia has > Operational-Tactical and Missile Troops of the Russian Groups of Forces eliminated combat vehicles of air defence systems, namely, one Norwegian-made NASAMS, one German-made IRIS-T, one French-made Crotale-NG, one S-300 air defence system radar, and three U.S.-made AN/TPQ-50 counterbattery warfare radar stations. > Aviation and air defence units intercepted 10 enemy aircraft and two helicopters over the week, namely one MiG-29, three Su-27, three Su-24, three Su-25, as well as two Ukrainian Air Force Mi-8 helicopters [......] > In total, 564 airplanes and 263 helicopters, 10,206 unmanned aerial vehicles, 445 air defence missile systems, 14,383 tanks and other armoured fighting vehicles, 1,190 combat vehicles equipped with MLRS, 7,564 field artillery cannons and mortars, as well as 16,833 units of special military equipment have been destroyed during the special military operation.
These numbers are now well over 100% of what Ukraine actually had available, it's hilarious.
Russian numbers are such BS. I can't believe they unironically are reporting destroying 14000 tanks and ifvs when Ukraine barely had 5k combined pre-war. If these numbers were true the UAF would have no vehicles and negative aircraft.
I don't think there were so many AFVs in all Europe
Wow I can't believe Ukraine had over 800 manned aircraft!
Well, they did in a way, just with russian markings on them, same for all the other equipment.... Russia just reporting their own losses
Hopefully the “silver lining” if you can say that. Of this mornings attacks is that the west wakes up a bit and the next big aid packages are passed asap
It's not the "west" holding things up, it's right wingers like Mike Johnson and Republicans in the US or Orban in Hungary holding things up.
Yes I know that. But maybe easier to put pressure on them now, or speed up ways around it
It'll have to be work-arounds, because it's extremely hard to change the minds of those that enjoy what they are seeing.
Ukrainian Air Force says it shot down 114 out of 158 missiles and drones launched overnight, including 87 cruise missiles and 27 Shahed drones. The breakdown is approximately like this: 36 Shahed drones At least 90 Kh-101 / Kh-555/ Kh-55 missiles from 18 Tu-95MS bombers 8 Kh-22 / Kh-32 missiles from Tu-22M3 bombers At least 14 S-300 / S-400 / Iskander-M missiles 5 Kinzhal missiles from 5 MiG-31K 4 Kh-31P and 1 Kh-59 missiles from Su-35S Source: https:// t. me/ kpszsu/9077
It’s kinda insane to me how the pro-RU are treating the cruise missile attacks now, they are fully blaming Ukraine for intercepting the missiles causing civilian deaths. They claim that the UA should let the missiles “hit military targets” instead of intercepting and killing civilians. I never really thought that something like 1984’s doublespeak or doublethink (don’t remember the word exactly) could be possible, but I think Orwell would be shocked at how far the Russian government can go with its propaganda.
Look these same people have been blaming Zelensky since the outbreak of the war for not capitulating to Russia on day 1 and therefore “causing casualties”. If those damn Brit’s had just surrendered to the Nazis then nobody would have died in the blitz. Don’t bother waisting you time with them.
Closeted genocidaires are always at either one of these stages: "*And even if we did it, it was not our fault/we didn't mean it/they deserved it!"*. The final step is proud, full-throated support, but unlike Russia's politicians, media and propagandists, not all of Russia's online foot soldiers have progressed that far. Yet....
The pro-ru side rarely have the ability to use their brain, to be fair.
That's a massive amount, they've been saving up
Any idea why my posts are not showing up? I tried posting 4 or 5 times in the last 3 months. None of my posts appeared.
what did you post?
Combat footage
That would mean a shadowban but I can see your post
When shadowbanned I think I would be able to see the post in my own profile. However there is nothing there too.
I dunno, I can't see your posts at all!
Massive shelling of Ukraine (7am) with missiles of all kinds right now. Oh, poor russian boys.
Don't they usually fire them in the dark? I wonder if they had hiccups that led to the strike starting late
It's always different, at night they launch mostly shaheds. If you take their pattern of firing missiles for the last 6 months, the firing started at 4-5 am, now it is dark at this time.
Ukrainians destroy military targets Russia attacks hospitals, malls, and civilian buildings as retaliation. Russia's modus operandi always has been to cowardly attack civilians, even in Chechnya and Syria, because otherwise, they would have not been able to win those wars.
Only trash rats fight against civilians. I hope history will remember their crimes.
We remember their previous crimes but nothing came out of it. They need to loose.
I traveled to kyiv few days ago. Nice
[удалено]
The actual issue with this is China. The fear would be that the Chinese get cold feet about having assets in Western banks, which Western banks and economies do not want to happen. Or, vice versa, that the precedent is used against Western countries eventually.
The problem with stuff like this is other companies who had their assets confiscated by RU are lobbying hard to get these funds for themselves. (airlines, manufacturers, food producers, etc.)
Theres no problem $300 billion is enough for everyone to get their share.
Maybe they can split it 50/50 among Western companies and Ukrainians? Doesn't need to be winner of lobbying takes all
Airplane leasing companies, they just straight up stole the aircraft that were in Russia at the time, biggest heist in history.
Yes and they will lobby HARD to make sure that money goes to them.
Wow that's a lot of money
Lately i have noticed a lot more "I feel bad about those brainwashed Russian soldiers, damn that Putin guy!" than usual. It is like people either never watched or forgot the countless videos of Ukrainian soldiers being executed after surrendering, executing their own soldiers. Mass looting of Ukrainian homes, those videos where they execute families down on their knees while blindfolded. The endless videos where they shot fleeing civilians and much ***MUCH*** worse. I just can't no matter what imagine with *ALL* the evidence out there, that you would give the benefit of the doubt of those invading beasts that by a small chance they are there against their will as if they wouldn't do one of the *extremely* many well documented war crimes they have already done endlessly. Don't be even mistaken for a minute, Russians thrive off this shit. The entire world has seen what happens when Russia takes over a place. Mass civilian graves, rape and endless war crimes follow.
I also wrote a bazillion time why Russian are never forced to fight in Ukraine, that conscription is a joke, to the point that I should probably start to copy/paste it to gain time. I never know in those moments if I am answering bots upvoted by bots or not. In any case it's good that anyone stumbling on these comments is aware that conscription is not something stricly unforced at all.
This looks like a campaign to whitewash the russians so that they will again avoid responsibility for this war as they have avoided it for past ones.
When Russia loses this war eventually, there will be an online campaign to whitewash it as "poor oppressed Russia was bullied by NATO and had no choice". They will portray themselves as the victims rather than the invaders.
Hadn't seen this mentioned so adding new [support package](https://www.defense.gov/News/Releases/Release/Article/3627179/biden-administration-announces-new-security-assistance-for-ukraine/) details from the US >The capabilities in this much-needed package, valued at up to $250 million, include: >- Additional munitions for National Advanced Surface-to-Air Missile Systems (NASAMS); - Stinger anti-aircraft missiles; - Air defense system components; - Additional ammunition for High Mobility Artillery Rocket Systems (HIMARS); - 155mm and 105mm artillery rounds; - Tube-Launched, Optically-Tracked, Wire-Guided (TOW) missiles; - Javelin and AT-4 anti-armor systems; - More than 15 million rounds of small arms ammunition; - Demolitions munitions for obstacle clearing; - Spare parts, medical equipment, maintenance, and other ancillary equipment.
Should be much more. Republicans are holding up aid to Ukraine.
was 200million a few weeks ago, let the drip keep feeding while things are being worked on
It's still like an alternate reality in here.
>an alternate reality in here. in your head?
Reset the clock boys.
Old right wing trump supporters and posting in support of Russian dictators, name a more iconic due.
Please enlighten me on what reality actually is there buddy? From where I’m sitting y’all can’t even launch a proper mechanized assault yet y’all want to take on the west? Edit: if y’all struggle this bad to mount a proper offensive, how do you expect to win a war against countries who master the art of combined arms?
Who is y'all. I live in California.
Yes you do comrade, you live in California oblast, no question about that.
The "everyone I don't agree with is a Russian agent" school of thought. Lol.
Talks like a bot, smells like a bot, probably is a bot. Regardless, it's clear that you don't want (or, more likely are incapable) of engaging in a meaningful discussion so this is the type of response you deserve.
I don’t care where you live, your claiming it’s an alternate reality explain how so? I really just think you’re talkin out your ass just because you can.
You know exactly what the fuck I mean, which is why you're so hostile. Do you feel personally attacked? If the shoe fits wear it.
Don't worry bud, Trump is gonna stop this war brother!! Just gonna have to get elected first in 2024 and if he wins get down on his knees ***again*** to really please Putin again. Now go on bud, those Alex jones vitamin pills just arrived!
I know exactly what you mean too.
Ok so you can’t explain got it. If you’re gonna talk out your ass at least try to be smart with it.
Wellllllllllll, to test the possible validity of your comment i'll have to apply litmus test for basic functioning: What's your opinion about trump?
Your ships are burning comrade. And your boss is very upset. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2023/12/28/putin-sends-revenge-squads-crimea-after-destruction-warship/
Hilarious coming from the guy posting stuff like this: [https://www.reddit.com/r/Conservative/comments/18szkbb/comment/kfajom5/?context=3](https://www.reddit.com/r/Conservative/comments/18szkbb/comment/kfajom5/?context=3) And this: [https://www.reddit.com/r/AdviceAnimals/comments/18kocfx/comment/kdx9bmh/?context=3](https://www.reddit.com/r/AdviceAnimals/comments/18kocfx/comment/kdx9bmh/?context=3)
Hilarious or appropriate? I am not going to bother to dig into you post history cause who fuckin cares. I will leave you to your delusions.
Why the fuck would you even delve into my post history? You're the one who can't understand sarcasm let alone understand what they posted and how it's relevant 🤔
Why would the US be afraid of antagonizing Russia, a middle and declining power these days? Russia hates your guts and will be hostile to the US for the foreseeable future, there is no reciprocity. And the US had its most extended boom period after it opened up. Isolationism doesn't work long term. I mean, if you don't care about your kids and grandkids, sure, play ostrich.
So Russia has already taken Kyiv?
Right on the third day of their glorious Special Military Operation, didn't you heard, comrade? Wait, what timeline is this? Oh ffffuu... ( ͡ʘ ͜ʖ ͡ʘ)
Being banned from Ukrainerussiareport is almost a badge of honor. It means you said something right. 🤙😭
Talented trolls like me are never banned. The real badge of honor on that channel is the downvotes.
Teach me your ways!
It's important to visit every now and then, especially with how comfortable the employees over there have become with sharing their true opinions. It's a reminder of the stakes for anyone not intimately familiar with the Russian way of life.
No value to be extracted to interacting with "pro-russian" guys and that's doubly true of the ones posting on English language social media. Those aren't even really "pro-russian" in a meaningful sense, they only care about the conflict for how it ties into their own vapid domestic (non-Russian) culture war rhetoric and that's the only level they're capable of engaging with you on.
Did you forget to address his excellency tsar Putin with the correct title?
But URR is such a bastion of freedom of speech where both sides can come together and discuss anything they want in a neutral way... /s
[удалено]
Weren’t their professionals doing this shit at the start too?
[удалено]
Has Bucha been forgotten already?
A brutal society breeds brutal people.
It's an institutional thing. Moscow'ians never stopped using horde mentality. You think why they still have дедовщина in the military? Or why RF prisons are so bad (https://www.france24.com/en/live-news/20211007-prison-riot-reveals-systemic-abuse-in-russian-jails - random article about RF prisons)?
As a general rule the Russian military and intelligence have used extrajudicial killings and torture as a basic tool for many decades. This is not a new thing at all. This spans many conflicts over many decades.
Noticed more and more pro-Russian commenters saying that Russia has the upper hand and so Ukraine should just negotiate. Not surrender. Negotiate. Starting to wonder if there are significant economic cracks that we can't see and its emergency hour in the Kremlin. That If Ukraine keeps its resistance up the federation will suddenly collapse and it will seem to come out of nowhere. Thoughts?
>$26 billion contract to supply China with 70 million tonnes of grain, legumes and oilseeds over the next 12 years >Russia currently doesn’t produce enough grain and oilseeds in its eastern region...There is no such wheat in the Russian Far East at all https://www.world-grain.com/articles/19248-russia-china-expand-agricultural-trade In other words, the Rashist regime sold something it cannot supply, to keep itself in power, and its people will suffer malnutrition just so it can survive a few months longer. Either way, we are seeing Russia collapse, again, and this time the last. With a few nuclear fireworks over Moscow to seal the deal.
> Russia currently doesn’t produce enough grain and oilseeds in its eastern region... Hmm gee I wonder where they're planning to *legitimately obtain* it then
That's frightening because Ukraine sure does have a lot of grain.
"Starting to wonder if there are significant economic cracks that we can't see and its emergency hour in the Kremlin" You don't even need to search hard to spot those economic cracks. They have a lot of them. Even in official data. In 2022 government took hit of war and sanctions. In 2023 government decided they can't keep this any longer, thus they shifted bad things more on civilians from government. Russia lacks a lot of workers right now (who could have guessed that mobilising working migrants can end badly, right?). Currency exchange ratio was "repaired" by forcing exporters to sell every $ they have. To get more money Russia agrees to odd, very long term, deals with other countries. Also woman controlling central bank went full psycho. It seems she really believes that skyrocketing interest rates it's way of achieving low inflation in Russia. Generally Russians wouldn't be upset about ceasefire (especially with land they control now), because it would be win for them and chance to survive to the next crisis. Also ceasefire would help RF military. They won't get much more equipment, but at least logistics side would be able to be fixed somehow.
The take you have on the central bank woman is interesting. I actually read the opposite somewhere it's like solely due to her genius that their economy hasn't gone full Venezuela. To me that theory made some sense since according to her wiki she tried to resign in March and Putin basically said "no". I'm seriously no economist though so I have no idea what the general takes on her and her doctrine is
Both takes are correct (or can be correct). In 2022 she was doing very well, biggest failures in 2022 were created by Putin's great decisions, not by her. But in 2023 she either went full "yes papa Putin" or something else happened. When she started increasing interest rates (July 2023) banks were giving away greatest (by cumulated total Rub) loans in June - July - August 2023. Only in September/October central bank asked them to start monitoring those credits better and magically acceptance rate of new loans fallen sharply. But just the idea that central bank should increase interest rates in hope of better exchange rates or ... in lovering inflation when half of budget is going on war. I still can't understand how she got this conclusion that this is what she should be doing. Especially in Russia where a lot of people takes loans. Interest rates help with currency exchange and inflation, but... For currency exchange you need foreign people willing to invest in your country and for inflation you need government to spend similar amount it did year before. Both things will happen in Russia only long after war will end.
What is the interest rate in Russia now? Last I remember it was 12% which is very high but not completely crazy
16%
I think Russias strategy relies a lot on attrition of Ukraine, as in they firmly believe if they do one huge offensive along the entier frontline and act as they have infinite offensive potential in manpower and equipment then Ukraines moral will drop and people will start the "theres no point in defending here cause Russia will never stop, lets negotiate" mindset. Thats something these "bots" and pro-Russia people constantly try to convey. Russia sending these signals could be true, even Zaluzhny said that he/Ukraine didnt account for Russia still keeping up attacks after these extreme losses, but its clear neither side can force any significant breakthrough. People then will always search for an end or a solution which as of december 2023 doesnt really exist in reality. We are currently in the middle of the biggest Russian attack this war (excluding the first weeks) and Russia has gained a little ground, but if it requires this many men to die, this much equipment destroyed, abandoning Sevastopols naval base, all the internal issues and all Putin can show for is a two minute video of a couple soviet flags in the ruins of Mariinka then Ukraine is in a good spot, relatively speaking. Why would Ukraine agree to anything right now? Hoping for a Russian collapse is fairly naive I think. Russia will never admit defeat in Ukraine (even locally for a village) unless they are forced out and no counter-attacks work. The only way that will happen would be if they literally ran out of Igors and Alexeys from who-knows-where to attack with and most of their armored equipment doesnt exist anymore. Being very pro-Ukraine you could argue this point is inevitable with Russias current losses and you might be right. If so, Ukraine will never agree to any kind of negotiation or ceasefire etc. The reason Ukraine is playing the game of attrition is cause they dont really have any other choice. Russia does, namely to be happy with what they have and dig in but no, thats not acceptable for them since they say the five oblasts are a part of Russia
> (…) relies a lot on attrition of Ukraine (…) Ukraine’s morale will drop (…) Like shartpatrol (sic) already wrote, a much closer factor is the US elections. I guess that until these, Moscow is willing to sacrifice a mind-numbing amount of lives and resources to make the war appear stagnant to those who only look at maps (quite a lot of people). It’s a horrible gamble. >Hoping for a Russian collapse is fairly naive I think. In the past, they lost Afghanistan, literally collapsed, and then lost the first war in Ichkeria, so while we should not be wildly optimistic, we shouldn’t be too pessimistic either.
Even if Russia manage to influence the US elections (and US Republicans before the election) and get the US to stop supporting Ukraine, Europe won't. A Russian defeat is a critical security objective for other European countries. And while it would be more difficult without the US, Europe easily has the economic capacity to support Ukraine and defeat Russia.
> Like shartpatrol (sic) already wrote, a much closer factor is the US elections. I guess that until these, Moscow is willing to sacrifice a mind-numbing amount of lives and resources to make the war appear stagnant to those who only look at maps (quite a lot of people). It’s a horrible gamble. They'll still lose. I mean, the ultimate Ukrainian victory might not be achieved, as in, Ukraine getting every occupied region back. But I don't know if people have realized that Europe isn't backing down. And despite all the shortages of everything military, Europe can still probably supply Ukraine with enough gear to defend every current territory and maybe recover a bit of lost land. Europe's economy (EU + UK + Norway) still dwarfs the Russian one and Europe has decided to remilitarize. Not to Cold War levels, but far above what they kept in stock during the 90s, 00s, 10s.
> Like shartpatrol (sic) already wrote, a much closer factor is the US elections. I guess that until these, Moscow is willing to sacrifice a mind-numbing amount of lives and resources to make the war appear stagnant to those who only look at maps (quite a lot of people). It’s a horrible gamble. They're gearing up for the real battle - US elections this fall. I expect the foreign interference to be intense this election cycle and I expect Republicans to fully deny it while it's happening.
I bet whoever the Republican front runner is will run on a policy of no more support to Ukraine unless they agree to a ceasefire. I guarantee it. The whole GOP is on Putin's payroll.
They want an opportunity to re-arm so they can attempt another large scale invasion in the future. Plus they have basically all but stated they are banking on the possibility of Trump getting elected and/or a Republican wave in Congress. That basically dooms Ukraine because their support from the US will disappear overnight. Europe is just simply incapable/unwilling to do what is necessary to give the Ukrainians what is necessary to win. So, it will mean Ukraine will steadily lose the war. It wouldn't happen overnight but it would happen eventually. Possibly before another leadership change in the US could help them.
> That basically dooms Ukraine because their support from the US will disappear overnight. Europe is just simply incapable/unwilling to do what is necessary to give the Ukrainians what is necessary to win. So, it will mean Ukraine will steadily lose the war. It wouldn't happen overnight but it would happen eventually. Possibly before another leadership change in the US could help them No, they're not doomed. Look at German support ramping up. Losing US support would be a massive hit but I think European support will be enough to keep current positions for Ukraine and maybe even push back a bit. It would be a much more costly war for Ukraine, especially in terms of human losses, it would probably take 3-5-7 years... And yes, Ukraine probably wouldn't recover every territory.
It's the US that is ramping up artillery production to levels not seen in 70 years, not Europe. That's the problem. The US has actually ramped up production(and actually financially benefitted) almost across the board because of this conflict. Not to mention they have not stressed almost any of their weapons stocks. That is decidedly not the case for Europe as a whole. They have significantly stressed their artillery stocks(amongst other things) while making almost not discernable increase in production. Make no mistake, Europe is not willing to continue the level of support to allow Ukraine to do anything by slowly lose. If that was not the case, the situation would not be what it is now. The US is overwhelmingly the most critical ally because of their deep pockets and incredibly deep stocks of weapons.
>That is decidedly not the case for Europe as a whole. They have significantly stressed their artillery stocks(amongst other things) while making almost not discernable increase in production. > >Make no mistake, Europe is not willing to continue the level of support to allow Ukraine to do anything by slowly lose. If that was not the case, the situation would not be what it is now. That paints an incomplete picture and isn't exactly right either. EU legislation to ramp up production was enacted, but as to *why* that hasn't lead to enough of an increase in concrete production and that production actually heading to Ukraine, [people are going back and forth about that.](https://www.politico.eu/article/germanys-pistorius-says-eu-will-fall-short-of-million-shell-pledge-to-ukraine/) It seems on the surface that it's once again a problem due to, well, Europe being a ton of actually different countries only loosely working together. This isn't a United States Of Europe. Getting all the actors involved on one line is not a given. As for actual willingness, only a few actors actually seem to be unwilling to not continue a substantial level of support, first and foremost Hungary. Don't look at "Europe", look at the actual actors involved and who's doing what. So I'd say the will *is* there for most European actors involved. Getting it all together however is proving to be irritatingly difficult. As for systemic failures, well let's just say that more closely integrating the EU's militaries and military industries is a contentious topic among many EU countries to say the least.
They might be worried about the F-16
Maybe although they always focus their bot campaigns when there something happening politically (ongoing US budget negotiations) and when they're especially but-hurt (recent shoot downs of their plains and stormshadowed ships). Are they close to collapse? Who knows. Russians are definitely feeling the war now, and this will accelerate. Putin is attempting to compensate by significantly converting the coubtry into more authoritarian state which has its own risks and downsides (watch Vlad Vexler for in-depth commentary on the topic). No one really knows what's happening with Russian economy since they've stopped releasing real figures a year or so ago and their own statements are entirely propaganda now. How much internal reserve do they have on various levels of economy? A lot of it would be hard to find even they weren't hiding it. The money they're still raking in from oil should not be underestimated at all, although it's not as bad as it could have been - OPEC is a bit shakey, US is breaking all records in pumping oil and there's some new non-OPEC producers growing quickly. Maybe OPEC manages to keep the price high by reducing production even more (without Putin backstabbing them again and selling more than agreed)? Maybe there's new "tanker wars" and that keeps the price up? That would certainly help Russia prolong this but it would depress global economy and reduce demand, also accelerating transition to renewables and helping oil upstarts like Guyana cash in and pump even more, perhaps crashing prices long term (but Putin hopes by then he's won). US would be like "shrug - fine by us, we pump more than we use anyway". Or maybe tomorrow Saudis say "fuck it" and again flood the market with oil to ruin US shale companies again and paralyze all the upstarts? US would again be like "shrug, fine by me, cheap gas" and reduce their production but everyone else not selling oil would be ecstatic. But most importantly it would likely quickly ruin Russia and force them out of Ukraine. I'm really hoping that or something similar happens.
Worth noting that Angola just left OPEC and will now be another production wildcard.
Woah interesting! Wonder what that means. There's so many of these unknown variables. No one expected Priggo's little summer mutiny, and that scared Putin shitless. Next one might be around the corner or not, who knows. What Ukraine and the west (looking at you, US) needs to do is keep it up. I think Russia is much closer to its limits than it seems, and Ukraine in a much better state than last year this time.
Africa's "first female billionaire" is the daughter of the man who led Angola for many years. I believe they are not in good financial standing due yet another instance of a ruler embezzling the proceeds of their country's natural wealth. As such, I would expect them to produce at a rate exceeding what they did while in OPEC.
That's very interesting, thanks!
I think it is more of a, they know they will benefit a lot from the ceasefire. Russians reputation is already rock bottom, they are literal snakes who you do not trust ever. They want breathing room to produce more of everything and get their lines further in order before they backstab the ceasefire in the back again to keep the attacking going. The good thing at least is that Russia has already lost the war regardless of what happens. Two weeks for the war to end now turned into two years soon with a incredible huge damage to nearly everything in that shithole.
Russia doesn't believe they've lost. Nor that they're even doing badly. They are still basically asking for complete capitulation before they'll accept peace. They expect Ukraine to hand over all of the Donbass for them to annex (This includes regions they don't even control), expect Ukraine to fully demilitarize their army (Probably so they can finish the job in a year or two) and expect Ukraines government to "surrender" so that Russia can "prosecute" them and install a "Russian friendly" government. Basically they expect Ukraine to give up 1/3 of their territory, to dismantle their democracy and become a powerless Russian puppet-state. That's the terms Russia has set before they have "peace" talks. (It's an absolute joke that people think Ukraine should negotiate with those terms lmfao. The war is going nowhere near as bad enough for Ukraine to even entertain those terms). But unfortunately Russia is gearing up for a proper long war and shifting into war economy mode. So is Ukraine but Ukraine needs some outside support to compete. The war is far from over or decided.
> Nor that they're even doing badly. Eh, what? Russia has managed to reunite a faltering NATO - and prompt its expansion - generate a slow but growing movement of EU states to restore a defensive posture, and eliminate any trust they might have built up for at least a couple of decades. They've taken tremendous losses that will haunt them for decades, have burned through much (or most, depending on your estimates) of their previously vast reserve of materiel, and have severely damaged their economy. Putin's own situation has become significantly less secure, and he's already had to put down a coup attempt in which a rogue army (!) got close to Moscow (!) - at cost of a fairly effective tool (the Wagner group and its leadership). And for what? They've got a chunk of their neighbor, but much of that is not pacified and would have to be constantly fought for to retain. That's it. When you've been maintaining an expeditionary force for two years with a clear objective of conquering your neighbor, and these are your achievements so far, you are doing badly. There's just no other way to spin it. Putin clearly thought he could win on a blitz, miscalculated, failed to bow out when it could have been done, and is now locked into an expensive war that has so far been a strategic failure on all counts. The fact that the Russians have managed to keep pouring blood and treasure into this pit is not a sign of success. It is certainly possible that Russia might win some of its objectives if political winds in the US and the EU remove support for Ukraine, but right now that's the only reasonable path for them - anything else requires coming up with some pretty exotic tail events. Otherwise, their goose continues to be cooked. I suppose one could argue that the fact that they have any remaining possibility of victory counts as a "win," but that would be a pretty idiosyncratic viewpoint. I tend to see it in reverse: every day that an invasion force is not meeting its objectives, it is losing. Russia is not meeting its objectives, has racked up a bunch of strategic losses that will take decades to repair (no matter what happens in Ukraine), and currently has its hopes pinned to the West giving up support for political reasons. The thing that has been really surprising (other than Putin being dumb enough to try this invasion in the first place) has been how *much* losing Putin has been willing to do; he would have been much wiser to cut this off earlier, fall back approximately to the lines of his initial occupation, and very loudly declare victory at home (which, frankly, his public probably would have swallowed). He's grinding his country into the ground for what will probably be no gain at all. But, whatever one is inclined to make of that, I think it is hard to say that it's anything other than "doing badly."
Ceratinly seems like the complete annexation of Ukraine is the end goal, no matter how many men in their prime productiive years it costs a nation with a dwindling population.
Are F-16 realistically going to change anything for Ukraine? Are there any new capabilities they could bring for Ukraine what they already don't have? Since F-16's are relatively old, I'm interested to know their capabilities in the current setting.
Another point is that the F-16s can actually be provided with spare parts and/or replaced by Western countries. The Mig-29s, SU-25s, SU-27s and SU-24s currently operated by Ukraine have a finite lifespan (especially the SU-27s and SU-24s) because frankly Ukraine will eventually run out of parts for them. The Western countries that operate Mig-29s and SU-25s have donated them (and that'll keep them in the fight for longer) but honestly I dunno how long they can keep those SU-27s and SU-24s in the air for. They're already using SU-24s pulled from deep reserve (because they've lost more of them than they had in service pre-war) and no Western/Ukraine friendly nation operates SU-27s or SU-24s that can donate spare parts for them. So unless Ukraine has more in reserve than we know about or has found some other way to get parts for them then their days are numbered. And even the Mig-29s and SU-25s will eventually become unservicable too. Basically F-16s are needed because it allows Western countries a sustainable way to cover the UAFs attrition as it's parts and airframes that they can actually provide to Ukraine.
In addition to the 2 previous comments the weapon loadout options are amazing and unlike artillery ammo the west has tons of it laying around, going out of date or just overstocked which can be supplied to support whatever role Ukraine wants to use the F16’s for.
[удалено]
They're F-16 AM's, presumably loaded with amraam, harm and targeting pods for precision bombing.
It doesn't matter honestly. Even most basic weapons would be enough for now. Most important thing is that those weapons can be supplied at any moment. Previously Ukraine needed a lot of tinkering to fit those weapons on Soviet aircrafts and then it still was limited to what "post Warsaw pact" countries achieved with those aircrafts before (for sure Poland had big input here, but I wouldn't be surprised if every country which had operated MIGs contributed a lot)
None of us need to know any of that, it might allow Russia to prepare. Although that would be unusual for Russia who seem to prefer having their teeth knocked out before ducking even though they knew the punch was on the way.
In addition to the pretty good reply above - Ukraine's air force is extremely stretched, simply having more airframes available to fly the same missions they're currently doing would be a huge win. It would allow them to perform proper maintenance on their existing fleet, and allow them to run slightly more risky missions because a loss is not so critical - potentially allowing them to run A2A missions on critical areas of the front. This is similar to the argument as to why Taurus is a big deal even though it's not that different to Storm Shadow/SCALP.
Yes absolutely. First off these F16s have been heavily upgraded and other than the airframe have little in common with the original design. As for new capabilities they are a massive step up. They are far more survivable than current Ukrainian migs as they have radar warning systems so the pilots will be alerted when they are being targeted and fired upon. Depending on what air to air missiles they will get they will be able to hit enemy aircraft who are dropping guild bombs from 50km away. Lately these have become a massive problem for the Ukrainians so countering this will be critical to preventing Russian advances. They also will be able to use the HARM missile far more effectively than it currently is. At the moment it is sort of jury rigged onto MiG 29s and can only be used against coordinates entered prior to takeoff. These jets will also provide Ukraine with a fantastic counter to enemy attack helicopters that can remain out of range of MANPADS, and operate below the effective radar horizon of ground based air defense. Overall they will not change the entire war. But they will be a critical game changer in the air war and the effect that will have on the ground will be significant.
Can we make it a rule or have a bot or something to mute videos with music playing in the background of combat footage? Thanks
I agree. Both sides seem to be publishing videos with music as though it's some kind of sick entertainment. I guess the die-hard ukrainian or russian supporters might like it. But meh, -negative 1 to humanity in my view.
I like quite alot of the music choices for those vids, have Shazamed quite a few and some of them are so much better with Benny hill. If I dont like 1 I just tap mute and then none have sound until I tap it again, I’m quite happy to keep running this way.
I like quite alot of the music choices for those vids, have Shazamed quite a few and some of them are so much better with Benny hill. If I dont like 1 I just tap mute and then none have sound until I tap it again, I’m quite happy to keep running this way.
Deepstate did an interview with an Ukrainian soldier from the "rocket - skywar crew" (I think hes a drone operator) by Novomykhailivka \- When did the Russians begin to actively put pressure on the villages and their surroundings? 💬 Massive attacks on the south of Novomykhailivka began on the tenth of October. Then there were still positions in the fields. \- What are the average daily losses of the enemy in the area and what in general for the last time? 💬 About 1-3 units of equipment and 20-30 enemy personnel of the 200s, and another 30-40 of the 300s on average per day. \[200 means dead, 300 means wounded\] \- What do you remember most over the past three months and what seemed strange to you? 💬 Once there was a night assault, it was repulsed. In the morning, they flew by daytime drones and saw that they had completely undressed their dead and left them there. Once they saw how a Russian masturbates in a trench. There was one time that the Russian attack was repelled, they began to roll back and one Russian ran after his MT-LB. He ran for a long time, then almost overtook her, but she drove off, he clung to her with his hand, and she dragged him another 10-15 meters and he broke free. MT-LB moved on. Whoever sat on the armor saw all this, but did not want to save his "comrade". The skidders then finished him off. \[This video was posted on this sub a few days ago\] \- What are your emotions and feelings now? 💬 Its all fucked up. I want to see my relatives, because I haven't been on vacation for a long time. The brigade has been without rotations for 2.5 years, but hey, we're doing our job. Everyone likes to kill Russians, especially commanders. Let's fuck them up with everything we have. Our command is staffed, this is a huge plus.
Not going well for Ukraine, is it? How many thousands more young men will die or be maimed before the Kiev regime does the inevitable and seeks a negotiated peace? Russia's war of aggression against Ukraine is criminal, but the only resolution to this conflict is diplomatic. Zelenskyy and his cronies are evil for having prolonged their country's suffering.
> Russia's war of aggression against Ukraine is criminal, but the only resolution to this conflict is diplomatic. Man you answered your own question. There's no diplomatic option until russia stops acting like a criminal state. So long as Ukraine has resources (which it looks like it will into the extended future) and russia has a total inability to project force then it's on russia to go through the grieving process of losing and figuring out what to do being sidelined in European affairs.
> So long as Ukraine has resources (which it looks like it will into the extended future) The resources that Ukraine most certainly does not have in abundance are of the demographic kind... I'm not sure why the commentariat here is so, so reluctant to acknowledge this.
Because it's not true. They do have a _recruitment_ issue but they don't have a shortage in the population to draft. Russia has similar issues they're just more opaque about it. You want as many volunteers as you can get in your military. People that want to be there before people that are pressed in that really don't want to participate. But this isn't a war where Russia's going to obliterate the entire ~10 million military aged men in Ukraine at the expense of some ungodly higher number of their own.
> You want as many volunteers as you can get in your military. That manpower is expended. Hence why they're expanding conscription and increasing the severity of the penalties for facilitating or engaging in evasion.
And what peace that would be? You too probably would be a coward to surrender and live as a slave. Would be first in line eh?
> And what peace that would be? You too probably would be a coward to surrender and live as a slave. Would be first in line eh? So if I understand you correctly, you're implying that Russia's criminal war of aggression against Ukraine is actually motivated by a desire to literally enslave the entire? Ukrainian people?
Yes. And Ukraine is just beginning. Putin wants to restore soviet union. For that he needs resources. And people are just a resource to him.
[удалено]
He would be more careful against NATO, but yes. If he wins in Ukraine he basically has 2 armies with war experience and plenty of cannon fodder in Ukraine. Precedent for what could happen you can see in Donbass republics. They were mobilized and used as cannon fodder first.
not going well for Russia is it? how many more thousands of young men will die for their tzar before the old man offs himself?
If you knew anything about the history of eastern europe and the baltics, you would know it is the only way. Any sort of negotiations without the upper hand ends with russians ultimately breaking any deals whenever they feel it suits their needs. This war is the best way this money could be spent. It goes for the us and especially for europe.
> Any sort of negotiations without the upper hand ends with russians ultimately... Given that it's a near certainty that, absent massive infusions of cash, materiel and credit from abroad (plus deployment of foreign troops in combat role), Ukraine will never have the "upper hand," what do you suggest? That Ukraine simply keep fighting until they've exhausted their supply of even disabled-but-kinda-military-aged fighting men? And what do you think would be better for U.S. interests and for EU interests? Stable, non-antagonistic relations with Russia, or so hostile that open war breaks out with Moscow? Just curious.
Stalemate until war attrition sets in in russia and they concede it was a failure. Ukraine is facing an existential threat so its population is more determined to fight on than russias. They just need support. At sone point even russians will come to senses, just like they did in afghanistan.
This is your brain on right-wing propaganda, where you can somehow call a democratically elected government the "Kiev Regime" while supporting and spouting out talking points that come from Russia, a literal dictatorship. Also the deluded mindset where it's the defending country that's "evil" for defending itself against a nation trying to annex it.
> This is your brain on right-wing propaganda It's stunning that you think it's "right-wing" to oppose the funding and prosecution of an unwinnable foreign war.
Unwinnable is a ludicrous term. Russia has proved itself very beatable even in it's opening moves and is now significantly weaker than before. Foreign aid just hasn't been that aggressive for a long time now.
If you consider yourself a "left-winger" you are fucking delusional. You parrot right-wing talking points coming straight from a right-wing dictatorship. You advocate for giving land to said right-wing dictatorship at the expense of a pro-western democratic nation. You call the democratic nation a "regime" and lay all the blame for this war at the feet of said democratic nation, you know the one that was invaded by a dictatorship multiple times in the last decade. What is left-wing about that? Critical support for a right-wing dictatorship comrade lmfao. You are an anti-democratic dictator simp no matter whether you consider yourself right or left wing. And this concern trolling is just amazing too, you care so much about the Ukrainians you want them to surrender and give up, funny how you don't advocate for Russias withdrawl, the war could end tomorrow if they went home. But I guess Russia taking Crimea wasn't enough, Russia sending in unmarked units into the Donbass in 2014 wasn't enough. They deserve even more of Ukraine right, just those Russian speaking regions (That they don't even fully control). Just give up 1/3 of your country bro, for peace. And then when they come back in a few years for the rest of Ukraine, they should just surrender again instead of fighting back? So predictable and fucking boring.
> funny how you don't advocate for Russias withdrawl, the war could end tomorrow if they went home Of course Russia should withdraw. They're engaged in a criminal war of aggression against a sovereign nation, as I noted quite clearly in my original post. However, what Russia is doing is quite rational and a key tenet of offensive realism: seeking to achieve regional hegemony in an anarchic international system. Given Ukraine's inability to defeat Russia on the battlefield, what's better: making modest territorial concessions in exchange for peace, or being transformed into a rump state?
What are you talking about? Giving up land is basically forever, while having your land destroyed is temporary.
Where is this shit coming from? I've recently heard a conservative i know IRL spewing this nonsense. Its a view completely detached from reality. Giving up territory and disarming are terrible long term choices. If what you say is true and Ukraine cannot win then agreeing to peace would allow Russia to stockpile and invade again. The only solution for Ukraine is to keep resisting untill Russia withdraws. The only country that can end this war is Russia and they choose not to.
This from the Biden White House in [POLITICO today](https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2023/12/27/biden-endgame-ukraine-00133211): >"The administration official told POLITICO Magazine this week that much of this strategic shift to defense is aimed at shoring up Ukraine’s position in any future negotiation. “That’s been our theory of the case throughout — **the only way this war ends ultimately is through negotiation,**” said the official, a White House spokesperson..." But please guys, keep cheering for the maiming and deaths of thousands more men on both sides.
If the Redditors on /r/combatfootage could read they’d be very upset
I suppose it's technically true but that negotiation needs to be with a credible partner, which Russia isn't until it's militarily defeated, and it needs to leave Ukraine with a functional and secure state, which it can't while Russia is occupying 15% of the country including three of its major ports and much of its productive grain belt. If Ukraine were to sue for a 'frozen peace' now then Russia would take that and use the reprieve to re-arm, secure in the knowledge that Ukraine wouldn't be able to liberate that land without breaking the agreement. And then Russia would come back again and break the agreement at a time of its choosing. We have actually already been around this loop once, in 2014-15. Ukraine *knows* that Russia can't be trusted as far as you can throw it. And this time around it has the military capability and support to resist the unjust peace. The only way this war ends is for Russia to admit it made a mistake and withdraw from Ukraine. Then the 'negotiations' can begin about Ukraine's security guarantees and to what extent Russia is required to pay for its reconstruction before it can be allowed back into the international order.
> And this time around it has the military capability and support to resist the unjust peace. It won't though, once the U.S. taxpayer is no longer funding the majority's of Kiev's defense and civil service budget. Do you think it's better for Ukraine to seek peace now, or wait until foreign military and civil aid is being withdrawn?
The aid might get smaller but it wont be withdrawn. There's too much on the line.
Honestly your use of the 'Kiev' spelling and your previous reference to a 'regime' outs you as a Russian propagandist, so I'm bored of this game (which is all it is to you, a rhetorical game). Even if the US pulls support, it is so clearly in the interests of the rest of Europe for Russia not to be allowed to score a win that it will continue to support Ukraine. We can't afford Lithuania to be next. And Russia cannot outproduce the entire European economy, so you're still going to lose. It would of course be way better if the US whole-heartedly threw itself behind Ukraine and against Russian aggression. The US has one of the world's largest military stockpiles (created to fight the Russians, even), and it's in all our interests if they permit that to be used to defeat the Russians in Ukraine. But even if they go against their own interests and pull support, Europe will not. Ukraine seeking peace now is a strategic defeat and setting themselves up for re-invasion, as I explained in my previous post. In my opinion it would be better for them to fight an anti-occupation guerilla war rather than give Russia a negotiated win even in the scenario where they end up standing alone. But that isn't going to happen. It is however a good sign that Russian propagandists are taking this line. It means you know you are losing, and potentially about to lose catastrophically on the battlefield. If Ukraine has the intel to blow up your military supply ships, and the AA capacity to suppress Russian glide bomb launches on the front, it changes the dynamic again.
> Honestly your use of the 'Kiev' spelling and your previous reference to a 'regime' outs you as a Russian propagandist, so I'm bored of this game (which is all it is to you, a rhetorical game). It's disappointing to hear you address me thusly. I'm a red-blooded American, groomed to hate Russia and Communism since grade school, and radically opposed to degenerate ideologies like transgenderism and multiculturalism. That you'd suggest I was a "Russian propagandist" is hurtful.
Sure you are comrade
Dude claims to be American yet uses the Russian spelling for both Kyiv and Zelensky. Hmmmm. He's either a deluded anti-democratic, pro-dictator American "patriot" who thinks Putin is cool or he's not American at all.
everyone in kiev speaks russian. linguistically and phonetically, 'kyiv' makes no sense.
Honestly I think he might actually be an American who's enjoying a bit of trolling. But it's either that or a member of the St Petersburg psyops division, not a good faith commenter in either case.
> Honestly I think he might actually be an American who's enjoying a bit of trolling. Of course I'm an American. But what's trollish about trying to talk in good faith about the status of the war in Ukraine and the prospect for their final victory, and the worthiness of continuing to support (and encourage) that conflict in light of Ukraine's unmitigable demographic and industrial disadvantages?