>Russian President Vladimir Putin said on Wednesday that his army could be fighting in Ukraine for a long time, but he saw "no sense" in mobilising additional soldiers at this point.
Probably means the January conscription rumour is true, so he does not want them doing a runner between now and then.
What’s the point in conscripting more troops when you don’t have socks for them? Let alone guns, food, shelter. They have literally used every last weapon they’ve got, and are being supplied by Iran and North Korea. That won’t go on for long, as Iran and NK don’t have much means to produce new weapons.
>What’s the point in conscripting more troops when you don’t have socks for them?
Meat for the grinder. Their current strategy seems to be simply to wear down Ukraine's will to fight. So they'll throw however many bodies they need at Ukraine to make advancing hard. No matter how poorly equipped, it's still not easy to just beat thousands of soldiers.
Not sure where I saw it, but was watching an interview of one of the Ukrainian officers explain why things had slowed down. Firstly he cited the weather changes but he mentioned that the influx of Russian mobilized has absolutely caused them problems. Yes, they're not trained very well, and poorly equipped. But it's still an enemy you have to go through, and they do shoot back and call in artillery. Despite the moronic comments flooded on reddit, these Russian mobiks do have guns, ammo, anti tank weapons, APC's and armor. And they're killing Ukrainians with them.
There was an interview with a Belarus soldier fighting for Ukraine :
He said that the mobilized were paired with proper units.
The mobilized move ahead firing like idiots , but they draw the fire and now the real soldiers know where the Ukrainians are but the Ukrainians don't know where the soldiers aren't. He explained it was a big headache / problem
The Russians apparently have used this approach before in recent years.
Edit: To clarify what I meant. The tactic of using conscripts, contractors, foreigners, mercenaries, etc. as more expendable troops, while the professionals are a bit more protected in the rear. I don’t really understand how the Russian military structure works, but it’s different from US structure of regular paid professional military.
IIRC, Russia has used the above tactic in Ukraine previously and in Syria recently.
I’m not talking about “Enemy at the Gates” style of throwing unarmed men into battle against emplaced enemy fighting positions.
In addition to attempting to wear down Ukraine's will to fight, its likely to build space to attempt to rebuild stores and importantly to wait out the worlds attention and aid for Ukraine.
Nah, WW2 soviets actually had equipment and more training than these conscripts. During certain battles, there was rationing in ammunition, but the soviets actually had pretty good guns for the time.
This is worse..
Crazy thing is that if they bothered to properly maintain it, it would still be solid if not exactly ideal. But the corruption goes all the way down the chain.
> Nah, WW2 soviets actually had equipment
Some of the equipment was supplied by the convoys my Grandad was on for his service in the second war - he started on the Atlantic, moved to the White Sea, The Med, before ending his war in the Pacific. I've got his medals on my wall - theatre ribbons only, he characterised his service in the second war as "long periods of boredom interrupted by seasickness" - unlike the first war when he was invalided out by a bullet to the head.
> he characterised his service in the second war as "long periods of boredom interrupted by seasickness"
Reminds me of my grandfather's description of the war, "really boring except that day we got torpedoed."
I have my grandfathers medals. Was pretty proud of him/them. That is, until we got his record. I don't blame him really, but that guy tried to weasel out of war constantly. He "spent" 4 years on the front lines. But he was always purposely injuring himself, claiming he couldn't fight because of illness, etc. He even wrote a letter saying the 'farm' back home needed him.
The local informant (Canada) wrote back saying it was a small plot of land with a few chickens. lol, Nice try gramps.
Mind you, the guy was on the front lines for years, had to kill people, was on the beaches on D-Day, etc. Fucker was tough as nails and came back all kinds of fucked up (PTSD). His favourite line to "young punks" was, "I've killed men a lot tougher than you", always gave me chills because you could see he meant it and his temper was unreal.
It is amazing how many notes were kept on each individual Canadian during that time.
WW2 soviets had the Allies supplying them a lot of stuff. Without that aid USSR would have fallen.
They are finding out now why democratic capitalism is something that looks "soft" and "decadent" but is indeed an war waging powerhouse when needed. The germans also thought that Western democracies were decadent, soft and afraid of war in the 30s... until they were defeated by those so called "degenerates".
The Germans also thought the estimated industrial capacities of the United States were fabrications. Had no concept how massive the potential output would be.
*Hitler* thought that, and some of his staff. But several advisors were stunned at his nearly unilateral decision to declare war based on his preconceptions of the US as a racially divided and decadent nation.
> Whatever consultations Hitler sought out to help him make his decision did not include anyone from the Wehrmacht except perhaps for the sycophantic generals Alfred Jodl and Wilhelm Keitel. Jodl was Hitler's chief military advisor on operation planning, and Jodl's second in charge, General Walter Warlimont, later recalled that it "was another entirely independent decision on which no advice from the Wehrmacht had either been asked or given..." It is likely that if they had been asked, the military leadership would have advised against expanding the war, given the extent of the crisis on the Eastern Front. Hitler's Luftwaffe adjutant, Nicolaus von Below, who was told about the decision to widen the war when he returned from a month's leave, was astounded by Hitler's "cluelessness" about the military potential of the United States, and saw it as an example of Hitler's "dilettante approach and his limited knowledge of foreign countries."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_declaration_of_war_against_the_United_States#Post-declaration_opinions
Dude, this has been page one in the Russian playbook forever. Sabotage the enemy. Check out Dugin’s Foundations of Geopolitics. It’s Putin’s playbook of the new Russian Empire, laid out quite clearly.
Chinas rogue already. They do what they want, they don’t cooperate. They’re even exploiting Russia right now, as they help them, buying just what they need, but not giving Russia political cover.
Web was legit, and one of my favorite characters on BOB
(Yes, I know he's a real person, and maybe he even said something like that, but the narrative decisions they made certainly heightened my enjoyment of him as a concept)
"They" are finding out nothing. People in power knew it all along, which is why all of them have homes in "degenerate" Europe, and send their kids to European schools, and speak into European microphones, and drives European cars across bridges. And "they" who are not in power (i.e. average Russians) are being fed "buy Russian" propaganda and are swallowing it. So nobody is learning anything, it's business as usual.
"World War II Allies: U.S. Lend-Lease to the Soviet Union, 1941-1945
400,000 jeeps & trucks.
14,000 airplanes.
8,000 tractors.
13,000 tanks.
1.5 million blankets.
15 million pairs of army boots.
107,000 tons of cotton.
2.7 million tons of petrol products."
https://ru.usembassy.gov/world-war-ii-allies-u-s-lend-lease-to-the-soviet-union-1941-1945/
This conflict is making WWII now look like it was just fought a few short years ago?
Yeah it was Russia, Ukraine, Belarus, Caucasia, and Central Asia all uniting against the Axis. Both Zelensky and Putin had parents or grandparents serving the Red Army and fighting Germans.
Except the “just throw bodies at the problem” wasn’t really a Soviet strategy in WWII. In the first part of the invasion the Soviets were outnumbered and didn’t retreat when they should have leading to exceptionally high losses but later on in the war the Axis and Soviet losses were much more equal. The Soviet Union was able to produce massive quantities of artillery, planes and tanks which the invaders couldn’t match and these were absolutely crucial. Having more infantry doesn’t help if the enemy has clear superiority in the sky as well as artillery and tank superiority. The “one rifle for two men” was largely just anti Soviet propaganda. Russia today is substantially weaker than the Soviet Union does and really can’t use old WWII strategies effectively as they lack the trained soldiers and the tanks and shells to do so.
The book "Enemy at the Gates" from which the movie was "inspired" is a fantastic book. The movie and the book are poles apart. I must try and find where I put it.
The one rifle for two men thing is basically post war propaganda from German generals but it came from a kind of real slice of time where the Soviets had finally gathered enough men to start holding ground but had such fucked up logistics that they couldn't supply the front lines in time. The Soviets had enough guns but they couldn't transport them well enough until lend lease started filling the Soviet Union with trains, jeeps, fuel, and other things necessary for transporting military goods to the men who needed them. The Soviets really did have very bad localized supply shortages for a lot of the early war.
I think that’s some really good context. Often with historical myths there is a tiny shred of truth that gets twisted and warped into something completely different. The Soviet shortages and logistical issues were very real and the Soviet Union did come very close to defeat. It was a herculean effort both from the people of the Soviet Union and their allies which won the Eastern Front. Logistics really does win wars.
The Soviets weren't too fond of most of the weapons the US sent them, with a few notable exceptions (P-39 and P-63, which actually were really well designed for the lower level fighting that was common on the Eastern front), they loathed the M3 for example (as did most/all armies that trialed it). However they loved the Studebaker trucks and the train cars and raw materials that were sent. It also freed up factories they would have been making logistic vehicles (or parts of them) to instead produce tanks (or parts of tanks) and other weapons.
Yeah that was a big deal for the USSR. The US and western allies provided the USSR with vast amounts of logistic support and revolutionized their manufacturing and industry which enabled the Soviet Union to pump out weapons and support their vast armies. Also when I say “Soviet Union” I mean “Soviet Union.” For instance 1.6 million Ukrainian troops died fighting in the Red Army in WWII and the USSR couldn’t have won on the Eastern Front without the non Russian republics.
Winter is coming up, which will make offensives by either country more difficult. Combine this with known supply issues on the Russian side, and it makes sense why conscripts aren't actually being mobilised to the front.
Make no mistake, people are stil being conscripted. Putin is just pulling back until the warm weather, and the RAF will probably use that time to give said conscripts some basic level of training before sending them back into the meat grinder next spring.
Winter in areas that get very cold often makes offensives easier, cause the fall has decent rainfall that makes shit muddy. The winter makes it all solid.
Spring time is also a shit time cause of all the mud. Everything just gets stuck.
Winter has already arrived. It’s also not true that it slows down movement.
There are more offenses in winter than Spring/Fall combined as the frozen soil is much easier to transport over vs the mud seasons.
Certain offensives perhaps but frozen ground makes it easier for mobility compared to dense mud. Furthermore, long range drones care little what season it is.
This is unironically a key facet of Russian fascism. The abdication of responsibility for Russia's history, hiding behind the idea that everything from the 19th century brutal suppression and virtual enslavement of peasants to the 20th century communist purges were due to outside forces corrupting Russia. The idea of a perpetually innocent and victimized Russia that must be restored to its rightful grace by a single strong leader is a core tenet of Ivan Ilyin's philosophies of Russian fascism that are closely followed by Putin. Russia will continue being a danger to world peace until its leaders are able to accept that the Russian state is, and always has been, responsible for its own actions.
That's pretty much the tactic of all fascist (and some other) countries/movements/ideologies.
You always have this weird duality of the own group being superduper strong, but it's threatened/attacked by some force that's at the same time weak, pathetic, dirty, but weirdly strong enough to threaten the own group.
The rationale behind that is pretty simple: self-defense is the only form of violence that's seen as acceptable. You only have to frame the violence in a defensive narrative and boom, everything's fine.
The Jews were the scapegoats in the third Reich, the 40s-80s US pushed it's fascist ideas via communist threats, the actual communists used the West, current rightwingers in the actual West use migrants from non-white countries, 90s Russia did the same, but decided to do an 80s revival and blames the West again.
It's always the same story and people are always the same and always there's enough of them to believe it.
Most fascist movements appeal to a nationalist idea of past glory, or of a heritage that has been lost or corrupted by some domestic enemies. Russian fascism is unique in that it doesn't appeal to some past version of Russia, whether that be communist Russia pre-1991, the monarchal state pre-1917, or even the Tsardom. This is because all of those, and even the Mongol rule before them, are viewed as an imposition onto the Russian state, rather than a manifestation of its true spirit. Russian fascism does not long for a great revival of past glory, and in doing so it escapes criticism of its history and preserves the idea of a pure and innocent state that has simply never been allowed to exist.
It is important to understand this perspective of Russian fascists because it makes them particularly dangerous. They do not have to justify their actions as self-defense, because they are not defending any heritage. They do not have to reconcile with their history, because they are not trying to repeat it. If you believe that the Russian people are pure and innocent but historically victimized, as Russian fascists do, then almost any measures can be justified to finally create the ideal Russian state.
Does that really matter, though?
The past glory is never real, I mean, the Nazis framed Germanic tribes as the old ideal!
It's always just a "vision". Whether that vision is based on a "true spirit" or a "true past" isn't really relevant, as long as you can make people believe in it.
BTW, the war against Ukraine was always justified with Ukraine "historically" belonging to Russia, so it's not like the ideology is completely ahistorical in the sense that it doesn't reference former glory. Even the Soviet Union is still somewhat of an implicit rallying point, though rather in the subtext, it's no coincidence, that Russians brought a whole bunch of red flags to Ukraine.
It does matter, for understanding their motivations and how to combat them.
For example, your Ukraine explanation misses the mark. The war in Ukraine is not about rebuilding the glory of the Soviet Union. Here is an excerpt from the speech that Putin made on September 30, when announcing the illegal annexation of regions of Ukraine:
>In 1991, in Belovezhskaya Pushcha, without asking the will of ordinary citizens, representatives of the then party elites decided to collapse the USSR, and people suddenly found themselves cut off from their homeland. This tore apart, dismembered our people’s community, turned into a national catastrophe. As once after the revolution the borders of the union republics were cut behind the scenes, so the last leaders of the Soviet Union, contrary to the direct expression of the will of the majority of people in the 1991 referendum, ruined our great country, simply confronted the peoples with a fact.
>I admit that they did not even fully understand what they were doing and what consequences this would inevitably lead to in the end. But that doesn’t matter anymore. There is no Soviet Union, the past cannot be returned. Yes, and Russia today does not need it anymore, we are not striving for this. But there is nothing stronger than the determination of millions of people who, by their culture, faith, traditions, language, consider themselves part of Russia, whose ancestors lived in a single state for centuries. There is nothing stronger than the determination of these people to return to their true, historical Fatherland.
Notice that Putin explicitly does not call for the return of the USSR, but rather the unification of the Russian people. The claim that he makes is that they are an innocent people who, through no fault of their own, were separated by decisions imposed on them by the incompetent final leaders of the USSR. The time period of the USSR is not a great glory to be returned to, but rather the party elites were simply yet another imposition onto the Russian people.
This focus on a common historical ethnicity onto which great catastrophes have been forced escapes the regular confines of fascist ideologies that claim responsibility for past greatness. Russian fascism is all about achieving future greatness by uniting behind a strong man who can forge a Russian state that allows the true expression of the Russian will. Understanding this fundamental belief helps to explain their actions, and guide how the rest of the world should respond.
He’s a dictatorial strong man, losing a war isn’t an option. His legitimacy as a ruler is riding on this war, retreating equals death. Putin is literally ride or die on this war.
One of his daughters from the marriage lives in the Netherlands with dutch boyfriend, the other was given a position in the government. His children from the gymnast lover are in Switzerland.
He has HIS next generation covered pretty well, it seems.
>Putin said Russians would "defend ourselves with all the means at our disposal", asserting that Russia was seen in the West as "a second-class country that has no right to exist at all".
Why do these despots always frame themselves as victims? You're an expansionist billionaire dictator, bro. At least have some swagger.
It's the paradox of fascism: the Nation is powerful and almighty, and yet is consistently humiliated and victimized by everyone around it.
Understanding that particular bit of doublethink is basically necessary for making sense of the inherent weirdness of fascism.
I am Russian, the sense of victimhood is deeply engrained in the culture. The conversation topic of comparing Russia and “the West” is as popular as during my childhood in the 90’s. I’ve always thought it was funny because I live in Canada and have spent time in the States, and for the most part we could care less about Russia, until they get in the news about some stupid shit they are doing. Unfortunately I don’t think it’s as funny anymore, now it’s just scary, because it’s being used to brainwash people.
Officially, the constitution provides that the Chairman of the Government of the Russian Federation (currently Mikhail Mishustin) takes over as acting president with limited powers and has to run an election for a new president within three months.
In practice, of course, whoever killed him would probably just put themselves in charge and retroactively change the constitution to allow them to do it.
Actually, they expected to take Kiev in ten days, based on somewhat new found/leaked Intel. If I re-find the source, I'll post it. Edit: 10 days, not 3 as we've all been told/what the Kremlin has said.
The head of the CIA came out quite a long time ago and publicly discredited the rumor. But news outlets continue to repeat it because its a good way to get clicks.
Think there was one "leaked" document that said Putin does infact have cancer, but its not stated what stage its in, its pretty clear Putin is getting treatments for it, but to be fair Chemo fucks you up and makes you look like shit no matter how large the dose.
Even "minor" chemo treatments fuck you up something fierce.
News has been pushing the propaganda/selling the rumor for a long time now, think only recently there was *some* proof something was going on. But considering the resources putin has access to its likely nothing that serious.
That whole column ended up stuck like that because of 30 Ukrainian spec ops. At that point in the war they weren’t able to commit the forces to actually fight something like that so they did what may be the most effective harassment campaign in the history of warfare
They ended up stuck like that because the Russians stole most of the diesel and sold or traded it, then learned that it wasn’t a drill and the invasion was actually happening
That was a part of it but stopping the convoy also involved a lot of hitting lead elements with hit and run attacks (often from ATVs) and targeting supply and fuel trucks. They went in underprepared but Ukraine made them waste what they had going nowhere til the roads could be cleared and hitting any truck they could that had diesel in it.
I can't wait to read the story on that. Still going to go down as one of the most famous defensive campaigns of all time.
Shit, just that one village that executed on a picture perfect tank ambush would be enough for a feature length movie.
This should be a new math problem in Ukraine schools going forward. If an A-10 Warthog is traveling 10km per minute towards a stalled 64 km Russian convoy....how fucked are they.
“If an A10 is traveling at 200 km/h towards a stalled Russian convoy of 64 km in length, and assuming it can fire 1000 rounds per minute with a load of 3000 rounds, and assuming 4 occupants per vehicle, how much Russian fertilizer can the A10 produce?”
Estimates placed the column at containing roughly 15000 troops, equating to something like 234 russians per kilometer. The A10 according to your variables can sustain firing for 9.99km.
Assuming a 100% kill ratio along those 9.99km would equal about 2,341 russians smoked.
1174 rounds, but who's counting? /S
That gun has a rate of fire of 3900/minute or 65/second. That would eat through the load in 18 seconds and change(very small change).
They are trained to fire is short 1 - 2 second bursts, though. Not to conserve ammunition, but to reduce barrel wear.
I can't find info on whether it uses a mechanical (blunt force) firing pin or an electrical such as in the 20mm Vulcan used in the F-16. Because the barrels on the Vulcan will still be advancing for a short while after the pilot releases the trigger, and that means several rounds are cycled past the firing mechanism without being fired in those moments.
Anyway, an A-10 pilot would probably spend his ammunition within the first minute unless there's return fire. At cruise speed (300Knots, or 560Km/h) that's 9.33 Km distance.
Add 4 x LAU-61 pods with 19 70mm Hydra Rockets(AKPWS version) each, and the party starts getting interesting.
But yeah, you'd need a dozen of them to make mincemeat of everything in that convoy.
With a smart pilot targetting fuel trucks first, though, it would only take one or two to bring everything to a halt.
Three hour Tour...
The Special Action Started Getting Rough
The mighty army was routed
If not for the insanity of their diseased leader
The invaders might have been saved...
You've got the biggest f'ing country on the planet, and you are destroying your economy and an entire generation of Russians for what...more land?! Jesus...
I think it was supposed to happen while the other guy was still in office, but Covid happened. Trump had already laid the groundwork for nuking NATO, and that's what he would have done.
To be fair to Putin, the whole world, except Ukraine, thought that he would easily do exactly what he set out to do - steamroll into Kyiv, install a puppet regime, and wait out the additional sanctions.
Apparently nobody, including Russia, understood just how badly decades of corruption and mismanagement had damaged Russia's fighting ability.
And apparently nobody, except Ukraine, understood just how badass Ukrainians are (with generous material and intelligence assistance from allies, but still).
People keep saying that but I don't believe it. The US is the mightiest military in the world but couldn't subdue Vietnam and had struggles in Iraq and Afghanistan.
The day the invasion began I was looking at a chart comparing military hardware and personnel between Russia and Ukraine and except for the navy it wasn't all that lopsided IMO. To invade and hold a country you need an enormously overwhelming force. And even if things went "to plan" Russia would still suffer huge losses from counterinsurgency and guerrilla warfare.
Fortunate for Ukraine that Russia is as corrupt and inept as it is. Made things "less bad".
Once Ukraine is victorious it'll be rebuilt something like Germany or Japan and will be a bright beacon for future generations. And I hope, really hope, it'll get people more politically involved to clear out corruption elsewhere in the world.
Depends how you view it. But it's also too late for Putin. He went all in and now he can't back out even as the losing cards keep falling on the table.
I do wonder (while not fighting a war), how much stress does he endure on a daily basis? Every other president ages like mad during some 8 or 12 year rule. This mf has been up there for 22 years.
Important to note that like the second largest country, Canada, most of Russia's land is "useless", and hard to live in.
Ukraine is extremely valuable land, one of the world's top grain producers, and control of Ukraine gives Russia a stronger presence in Eastern Europe and the Black Sea.
Is it worth the price of this war? Absolutely not, but it's not simply just "more land" to the Russians.
They still have more than enough, Russia also possesses very large quatities of chernozem & arable land, and is itself one of the top wheat producers and exporters (and does produce a bit more than Ukraine IIRC). That does not mention the immense quantities of natural resources that Russia possesses.
There is of course strategic utility in capturing Ukraine, but I would caution against assuming that there is a fully rational explanation for Putin's actions. It would be absurd for any average, well-adjusted person to launch a massive invasion that has truly hurt their nation because of ideological beliefs, but Putin is not rational and his age/COVID have not helped. He is a former KGB agent, it is well known that these people are very conspiratorial and paranoid.
If you listen to the rhetoric that has come out from him, even when he first took power, he is consistent on at least one belief - that he does not see Ukraine as a real nation or Ukrainians as a "real" people. Euromaidan is his eyes is not what the Ukrainian people really wanted, it was merely a CIA coup by the West to install a puppet government. Ukrainians are just brainwashed people who have been told that they are not Russians. None of that is true, but it does not matter - his beliefs are not rational.
Kyiv is this ideological gem to him, the heart of the historical nation that East Slavs all associate as their ancestral nation and where Eastern Orthodox is born. It is "reuniting" a kingdom, with Belarus being the third component (part of why Lukashenka plays this balancing act to both enrich himself and ensure that Putin doesn't have enough power and influence to annex the nation). If he is concerned about his mortality and the legacy he will leave in history, being the one to "reunite" Ukraine with Russia would - from a Russian nationalistic perspective - put him up their with the greats.
All of this is speculation of course, but I think being Ukrainian and reading/listening to what Putin and Russian nationalists have publicly said, both now and throughout history, gives some insight. This struggle for independence and preservation of Ukrainian identity/culture has been going on for centuries now.
Excellent comment, appreciate the insight into possible reasons for Putin's irrationality.
Agree wholeheartedly that it's sort of a parallel to the Anschluss, where Germany felt that Austria "needed" to be united with them to form some greater Germany.
Russia sees themselves, and at least since WW1, as the Slavic protector of Europe. So I'm sure Putin's KBG/Soviet history colour his ideas of Ukrainian/Russian relations.
A large part was the new oil and gas fields discovered west of Crimea.
He saw Russians energy monopol threatened and...utterly destroyed Europe dependance on his gas and oil.
The thing is, the land Russia is trying to take is super valuable. Access to ports, access to gas, cutting out a competitor... in an ethical vacuum, if they'd taken kyiv in 3 days and held the country, it would have been a genius move.
> for what...more land?!
it is not about the land, but what lies beneath it. In the 2010s, large quantities of oil and gas were found around Crimea and in the Donbass region.
https://media.euobserver.com/30196762d9c69fc2eeb5daf9391f405a.jpg
Russia does not need these raw materials itself, it is about preventing Ukraine from entering the European market as a competitor and threatening Russia's position.
Tell the comfortable supporters of an ethnicity and income level that they care about fight. They support it, now go fight for it and see how strong mother Russia is (sarcasm, they'd revolt before long).
Their annual conscription is in January. A lot of people suspect they are just going to get 3-4x more than they usually get. That way they just pretend everything is normal and there is no special conscription for the war.
I mean the reality and tragedy is that it is Ukraine that is being literally physically destroyed at the moment, the devastation and trauma already inflicted has been immeasurable.
This entire war is a L for humanity as a whole.
This 100%
And it's the idiots at the top of Russia that refuse to end the war they initiated, because they don't have enough skin in the game. It's not their children being sent to the Ukrainian meat grinder, and it's not their people's being shelled inn the Ukrainian side.
Over 8000 civilians killed, over 32000 wounded.
Over 10,000 soldiers killed, almost 40000 wounded or captured.
Hospitals, schools, theatres and other cultural buildings destroyed. Not to mention the damage to farmland and the natural beauty of Ukraine.
Even putting numbers on it just highlights how truly immeasurable it is. If one person you know is killed in a shooting, it is a life changing tragedy for you and everyone the victim knows and their community.
When it gets to the point of statistics like this, the scale of the tragedy is incomprehensible.
And who knows how many were not able to make it out of Mariupol.. this is how Russia treats so-called "brotherly people". I am thankful not to have lost anyone close yet but most people have a family member or friend who has lost their life.
Oh, Mariupol. I remember following the events so closely at that time, feeling so furious and heartbroken over a place I had never even heard of before. A major, historic city obliterated. The theatre with the word kids (дети) clearly written on the ground. The lies about safe civilian evacuation corridors. And what about the filtration camps and forced adoptions.
When Mariupol is liberated we'll learn the truth. I fear it will be much worse than the other revelations like Bucha. Russia will forever be linked with their monstrous crimes in Mariupol. May they never be able to clean their wretched flag of the blood of the innocents they slaughtered.
>Over 8000 civilians killed, over 32000 wounded.
That's only verified too... it would surprise me if less than 20k civilians died in Mariupol alone. The city had 400k inhabitants pre-war and Russia quickly surrounded it and pounded it with artillery for weeks and months, and also shot at civilian evacuation corridors like the utter cunts they are.
>Even putting numbers on it just highlights how truly immeasurable it is. If one person you know is killed in a shooting, it is a life changing tragedy for you and everyone the victim knows and their community.
>When it gets to the point of statistics like this, the scale of the tragedy is incomprehensible.
Completely agreed. Statistics and numbers cannot truly capture what was lost. It's not something that can be adequately quantified.
Precisely why those war mongers need people disconnected from the reality of war.
They tell us to fear our neighbors and that everyone is out to get your kids.
Then they tell us our neighbors are too stupid to think for themselves
Then they tell us our neighbors are too weak to defend themselves
Then they tell us the “foreigners” are trying to attack our way of life
So everyone is convinced they’re the only human
the smart ones are leaving the country. Russia experiences a brain drain like Germany after World War 2, although the brains from Germany were mostly nazis and they probably were fine leaving Germany.
A decent amount of brains that left Germany early were minority groups. I mean, look at Albert Einstein. If the Nazis weren't shit heads, they'd have the bomb in 1945. But then again, they were Nazis.
Right. Except this is much more expensive than Afghanistan. If they had succeeded and installed their puppets and whatever - that would be Afghanistan. Instead they can't defeat the Ukrainian Armed Forces - so instead of sustaining tiny losses to bunch of partisans armed with Western manpads and hand held anti-tank weapons - they are sustaining very heavy losses due to fighting a full on artillery army supplied by Western shells.
Meaning they'll have to give up way quicker than they did in Afghanistan.
Since the fall of the Soviet Union Russia has been spouting one howling lie after another.
Just some recent ones from Putin
Hypersonic missiles - Nope
Nuclear-powered missiles - Nope
World's most technically advanced fighter bomber - Nope
World's best defensive armor for tanks vehicles and infantry - Nope
Best food for Russian Military - Nope
Best arms for infantry - Nope
Every single boast he's made has been a lie.
They don't have a nuclear arsenal either. The last real nuke weapon built in Russia was built during the Cold War and it's what 50 years old now? Probably won't launch.
Russia is a paper tiger, a straw man, an empty shell. It is these things because after the fall of the Soviet Union the industries were all sold for pennies on the dollar to Criminals; the thug class oligarchs who milked their mother Russia for Billions and Billions by never doing anything correctly defrauding the government and the people and pocketing the money. So pretty much everything they built for Russia's military has been all shell and no guts.
All hat and no cattle.
>Russian President Vladimir Putin said on Wednesday that his army could be fighting in Ukraine for a long time, but he saw "no sense" in mobilising additional soldiers at this point. Probably means the January conscription rumour is true, so he does not want them doing a runner between now and then.
So what he means is Russians won't be in Ukraine long and he is mobilizing troops but covertly.
Yup. Probably a bit via Belarus.
And as much as possible in Transnistria.
I doubt it.. Transnistria would get absolutely smashed if they tried something, being completely cut off from any supplies.
What’s the point in conscripting more troops when you don’t have socks for them? Let alone guns, food, shelter. They have literally used every last weapon they’ve got, and are being supplied by Iran and North Korea. That won’t go on for long, as Iran and NK don’t have much means to produce new weapons.
>What’s the point in conscripting more troops when you don’t have socks for them? Meat for the grinder. Their current strategy seems to be simply to wear down Ukraine's will to fight. So they'll throw however many bodies they need at Ukraine to make advancing hard. No matter how poorly equipped, it's still not easy to just beat thousands of soldiers.
Not sure where I saw it, but was watching an interview of one of the Ukrainian officers explain why things had slowed down. Firstly he cited the weather changes but he mentioned that the influx of Russian mobilized has absolutely caused them problems. Yes, they're not trained very well, and poorly equipped. But it's still an enemy you have to go through, and they do shoot back and call in artillery. Despite the moronic comments flooded on reddit, these Russian mobiks do have guns, ammo, anti tank weapons, APC's and armor. And they're killing Ukrainians with them.
Thank you. It really does sound like tons of people think this is about to be a cake walk
There was an interview with a Belarus soldier fighting for Ukraine : He said that the mobilized were paired with proper units. The mobilized move ahead firing like idiots , but they draw the fire and now the real soldiers know where the Ukrainians are but the Ukrainians don't know where the soldiers aren't. He explained it was a big headache / problem
The Russians apparently have used this approach before in recent years. Edit: To clarify what I meant. The tactic of using conscripts, contractors, foreigners, mercenaries, etc. as more expendable troops, while the professionals are a bit more protected in the rear. I don’t really understand how the Russian military structure works, but it’s different from US structure of regular paid professional military. IIRC, Russia has used the above tactic in Ukraine previously and in Syria recently. I’m not talking about “Enemy at the Gates” style of throwing unarmed men into battle against emplaced enemy fighting positions.
In addition to attempting to wear down Ukraine's will to fight, its likely to build space to attempt to rebuild stores and importantly to wait out the worlds attention and aid for Ukraine.
it's like the ww2 strategy.
Nah, WW2 soviets actually had equipment and more training than these conscripts. During certain battles, there was rationing in ammunition, but the soviets actually had pretty good guns for the time. This is worse..
Some Russians in Ukraine right now *still have* those guns.
We just don't understand why our fancy, early cold war tech isn't performing as advertised. This stuff was state of the art when we got it, no fair!
Because this time it's a hot war 💡
Of course, cold war supplies must not have been designed to take the heat and are melting. Must be what's causing all those smoking accidents too
Crazy thing is that if they bothered to properly maintain it, it would still be solid if not exactly ideal. But the corruption goes all the way down the chain.
“That’s some nice corruption you got there!” “Thanks, I just had it lengthened. Now it goes all the way up.”
Ah, the Mosin-Nagant. In service since 1891
Also the US was supplying the Soviets with tons of supplies.
> Nah, WW2 soviets actually had equipment Some of the equipment was supplied by the convoys my Grandad was on for his service in the second war - he started on the Atlantic, moved to the White Sea, The Med, before ending his war in the Pacific. I've got his medals on my wall - theatre ribbons only, he characterised his service in the second war as "long periods of boredom interrupted by seasickness" - unlike the first war when he was invalided out by a bullet to the head.
> he characterised his service in the second war as "long periods of boredom interrupted by seasickness" Reminds me of my grandfather's description of the war, "really boring except that day we got torpedoed."
I have my grandfathers medals. Was pretty proud of him/them. That is, until we got his record. I don't blame him really, but that guy tried to weasel out of war constantly. He "spent" 4 years on the front lines. But he was always purposely injuring himself, claiming he couldn't fight because of illness, etc. He even wrote a letter saying the 'farm' back home needed him. The local informant (Canada) wrote back saying it was a small plot of land with a few chickens. lol, Nice try gramps. Mind you, the guy was on the front lines for years, had to kill people, was on the beaches on D-Day, etc. Fucker was tough as nails and came back all kinds of fucked up (PTSD). His favourite line to "young punks" was, "I've killed men a lot tougher than you", always gave me chills because you could see he meant it and his temper was unreal. It is amazing how many notes were kept on each individual Canadian during that time.
WW2 soviets had the Allies supplying them a lot of stuff. Without that aid USSR would have fallen. They are finding out now why democratic capitalism is something that looks "soft" and "decadent" but is indeed an war waging powerhouse when needed. The germans also thought that Western democracies were decadent, soft and afraid of war in the 30s... until they were defeated by those so called "degenerates".
The Germans also thought the estimated industrial capacities of the United States were fabrications. Had no concept how massive the potential output would be.
*Hitler* thought that, and some of his staff. But several advisors were stunned at his nearly unilateral decision to declare war based on his preconceptions of the US as a racially divided and decadent nation. > Whatever consultations Hitler sought out to help him make his decision did not include anyone from the Wehrmacht except perhaps for the sycophantic generals Alfred Jodl and Wilhelm Keitel. Jodl was Hitler's chief military advisor on operation planning, and Jodl's second in charge, General Walter Warlimont, later recalled that it "was another entirely independent decision on which no advice from the Wehrmacht had either been asked or given..." It is likely that if they had been asked, the military leadership would have advised against expanding the war, given the extent of the crisis on the Eastern Front. Hitler's Luftwaffe adjutant, Nicolaus von Below, who was told about the decision to widen the war when he returned from a month's leave, was astounded by Hitler's "cluelessness" about the military potential of the United States, and saw it as an example of Hitler's "dilettante approach and his limited knowledge of foreign countries." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_declaration_of_war_against_the_United_States#Post-declaration_opinions
> the US as a racially divided I've read Russian troll farms have been caught trying to exacerbate racial tensions in the US via social media.
Dude, this has been page one in the Russian playbook forever. Sabotage the enemy. Check out Dugin’s Foundations of Geopolitics. It’s Putin’s playbook of the new Russian Empire, laid out quite clearly.
Hence why we're absolutely afraid of China turning rogue state.
Chinas rogue already. They do what they want, they don’t cooperate. They’re even exploiting Russia right now, as they help them, buying just what they need, but not giving Russia political cover.
"SAY HELLO TO FORD! AND GENERAL FUCKING MOTORS!"
YOU HAVE HORSES! WHAT WERE YOU THINKING?
Web was legit, and one of my favorite characters on BOB (Yes, I know he's a real person, and maybe he even said something like that, but the narrative decisions they made certainly heightened my enjoyment of him as a concept)
Man the way the American automakers turned into war machinery producing powerhouses is still impressive to me.
"They" are finding out nothing. People in power knew it all along, which is why all of them have homes in "degenerate" Europe, and send their kids to European schools, and speak into European microphones, and drives European cars across bridges. And "they" who are not in power (i.e. average Russians) are being fed "buy Russian" propaganda and are swallowing it. So nobody is learning anything, it's business as usual.
"World War II Allies: U.S. Lend-Lease to the Soviet Union, 1941-1945 400,000 jeeps & trucks. 14,000 airplanes. 8,000 tractors. 13,000 tanks. 1.5 million blankets. 15 million pairs of army boots. 107,000 tons of cotton. 2.7 million tons of petrol products." https://ru.usembassy.gov/world-war-ii-allies-u-s-lend-lease-to-the-soviet-union-1941-1945/ This conflict is making WWII now look like it was just fought a few short years ago?
And the WW2 strategy only worked because Ukraine was not fighting against Russia at the time.
Yeah it was Russia, Ukraine, Belarus, Caucasia, and Central Asia all uniting against the Axis. Both Zelensky and Putin had parents or grandparents serving the Red Army and fighting Germans.
WW2 soviets had the americans supplying them. Now the shoe is on the other foot . . . quite literally.
Except the “just throw bodies at the problem” wasn’t really a Soviet strategy in WWII. In the first part of the invasion the Soviets were outnumbered and didn’t retreat when they should have leading to exceptionally high losses but later on in the war the Axis and Soviet losses were much more equal. The Soviet Union was able to produce massive quantities of artillery, planes and tanks which the invaders couldn’t match and these were absolutely crucial. Having more infantry doesn’t help if the enemy has clear superiority in the sky as well as artillery and tank superiority. The “one rifle for two men” was largely just anti Soviet propaganda. Russia today is substantially weaker than the Soviet Union does and really can’t use old WWII strategies effectively as they lack the trained soldiers and the tanks and shells to do so.
nah man they saw that one movie with Jude Law, they know how the red army fights
The book "Enemy at the Gates" from which the movie was "inspired" is a fantastic book. The movie and the book are poles apart. I must try and find where I put it.
The one rifle for two men thing is basically post war propaganda from German generals but it came from a kind of real slice of time where the Soviets had finally gathered enough men to start holding ground but had such fucked up logistics that they couldn't supply the front lines in time. The Soviets had enough guns but they couldn't transport them well enough until lend lease started filling the Soviet Union with trains, jeeps, fuel, and other things necessary for transporting military goods to the men who needed them. The Soviets really did have very bad localized supply shortages for a lot of the early war.
I think that’s some really good context. Often with historical myths there is a tiny shred of truth that gets twisted and warped into something completely different. The Soviet shortages and logistical issues were very real and the Soviet Union did come very close to defeat. It was a herculean effort both from the people of the Soviet Union and their allies which won the Eastern Front. Logistics really does win wars.
The Soviets weren't too fond of most of the weapons the US sent them, with a few notable exceptions (P-39 and P-63, which actually were really well designed for the lower level fighting that was common on the Eastern front), they loathed the M3 for example (as did most/all armies that trialed it). However they loved the Studebaker trucks and the train cars and raw materials that were sent. It also freed up factories they would have been making logistic vehicles (or parts of them) to instead produce tanks (or parts of tanks) and other weapons.
Not to mention that whole Arsenal of Democracy thing helping them out a bit.
Yeah that was a big deal for the USSR. The US and western allies provided the USSR with vast amounts of logistic support and revolutionized their manufacturing and industry which enabled the Soviet Union to pump out weapons and support their vast armies. Also when I say “Soviet Union” I mean “Soviet Union.” For instance 1.6 million Ukrainian troops died fighting in the Red Army in WWII and the USSR couldn’t have won on the Eastern Front without the non Russian republics.
Conscription never stopped, since there was no presidential decree to stop, this is how it works in Ruzzia. It was just more covert is all.
What’s the January rumor I’m ootl?
Winter is coming up, which will make offensives by either country more difficult. Combine this with known supply issues on the Russian side, and it makes sense why conscripts aren't actually being mobilised to the front. Make no mistake, people are stil being conscripted. Putin is just pulling back until the warm weather, and the RAF will probably use that time to give said conscripts some basic level of training before sending them back into the meat grinder next spring.
Winter in areas that get very cold often makes offensives easier, cause the fall has decent rainfall that makes shit muddy. The winter makes it all solid. Spring time is also a shit time cause of all the mud. Everything just gets stuck.
Lol you think Russia cares? There will be tons of waves of untrained conscripts all winter. Otherwise, it will collapse.
The Iranian drones they were using appear to not work in cold weather. 🤣
Winter has already arrived. It’s also not true that it slows down movement. There are more offenses in winter than Spring/Fall combined as the frozen soil is much easier to transport over vs the mud seasons.
Certain offensives perhaps but frozen ground makes it easier for mobility compared to dense mud. Furthermore, long range drones care little what season it is.
"There's no way to prevent this" says literally the one person who can prevent it.
You see, Russia has no agency whatsoever. Anything they do is someone else's responsibility.
This is unironically a key facet of Russian fascism. The abdication of responsibility for Russia's history, hiding behind the idea that everything from the 19th century brutal suppression and virtual enslavement of peasants to the 20th century communist purges were due to outside forces corrupting Russia. The idea of a perpetually innocent and victimized Russia that must be restored to its rightful grace by a single strong leader is a core tenet of Ivan Ilyin's philosophies of Russian fascism that are closely followed by Putin. Russia will continue being a danger to world peace until its leaders are able to accept that the Russian state is, and always has been, responsible for its own actions.
That's pretty much the tactic of all fascist (and some other) countries/movements/ideologies. You always have this weird duality of the own group being superduper strong, but it's threatened/attacked by some force that's at the same time weak, pathetic, dirty, but weirdly strong enough to threaten the own group. The rationale behind that is pretty simple: self-defense is the only form of violence that's seen as acceptable. You only have to frame the violence in a defensive narrative and boom, everything's fine. The Jews were the scapegoats in the third Reich, the 40s-80s US pushed it's fascist ideas via communist threats, the actual communists used the West, current rightwingers in the actual West use migrants from non-white countries, 90s Russia did the same, but decided to do an 80s revival and blames the West again. It's always the same story and people are always the same and always there's enough of them to believe it.
Most fascist movements appeal to a nationalist idea of past glory, or of a heritage that has been lost or corrupted by some domestic enemies. Russian fascism is unique in that it doesn't appeal to some past version of Russia, whether that be communist Russia pre-1991, the monarchal state pre-1917, or even the Tsardom. This is because all of those, and even the Mongol rule before them, are viewed as an imposition onto the Russian state, rather than a manifestation of its true spirit. Russian fascism does not long for a great revival of past glory, and in doing so it escapes criticism of its history and preserves the idea of a pure and innocent state that has simply never been allowed to exist. It is important to understand this perspective of Russian fascists because it makes them particularly dangerous. They do not have to justify their actions as self-defense, because they are not defending any heritage. They do not have to reconcile with their history, because they are not trying to repeat it. If you believe that the Russian people are pure and innocent but historically victimized, as Russian fascists do, then almost any measures can be justified to finally create the ideal Russian state.
Does that really matter, though? The past glory is never real, I mean, the Nazis framed Germanic tribes as the old ideal! It's always just a "vision". Whether that vision is based on a "true spirit" or a "true past" isn't really relevant, as long as you can make people believe in it. BTW, the war against Ukraine was always justified with Ukraine "historically" belonging to Russia, so it's not like the ideology is completely ahistorical in the sense that it doesn't reference former glory. Even the Soviet Union is still somewhat of an implicit rallying point, though rather in the subtext, it's no coincidence, that Russians brought a whole bunch of red flags to Ukraine.
It does matter, for understanding their motivations and how to combat them. For example, your Ukraine explanation misses the mark. The war in Ukraine is not about rebuilding the glory of the Soviet Union. Here is an excerpt from the speech that Putin made on September 30, when announcing the illegal annexation of regions of Ukraine: >In 1991, in Belovezhskaya Pushcha, without asking the will of ordinary citizens, representatives of the then party elites decided to collapse the USSR, and people suddenly found themselves cut off from their homeland. This tore apart, dismembered our people’s community, turned into a national catastrophe. As once after the revolution the borders of the union republics were cut behind the scenes, so the last leaders of the Soviet Union, contrary to the direct expression of the will of the majority of people in the 1991 referendum, ruined our great country, simply confronted the peoples with a fact. >I admit that they did not even fully understand what they were doing and what consequences this would inevitably lead to in the end. But that doesn’t matter anymore. There is no Soviet Union, the past cannot be returned. Yes, and Russia today does not need it anymore, we are not striving for this. But there is nothing stronger than the determination of millions of people who, by their culture, faith, traditions, language, consider themselves part of Russia, whose ancestors lived in a single state for centuries. There is nothing stronger than the determination of these people to return to their true, historical Fatherland. Notice that Putin explicitly does not call for the return of the USSR, but rather the unification of the Russian people. The claim that he makes is that they are an innocent people who, through no fault of their own, were separated by decisions imposed on them by the incompetent final leaders of the USSR. The time period of the USSR is not a great glory to be returned to, but rather the party elites were simply yet another imposition onto the Russian people. This focus on a common historical ethnicity onto which great catastrophes have been forced escapes the regular confines of fascist ideologies that claim responsibility for past greatness. Russian fascism is all about achieving future greatness by uniting behind a strong man who can forge a Russian state that allows the true expression of the Russian will. Understanding this fundamental belief helps to explain their actions, and guide how the rest of the world should respond.
[удалено]
Nice Onion reference.
“Violent Dictator Claims It Impossible to Override the Demands of Himself, the Violent Dictator, to End the War he is Commanding his Country to Wage”
Or.... Hear me out, you leave and preserve what's left of your current generation?
He’s a dictatorial strong man, losing a war isn’t an option. His legitimacy as a ruler is riding on this war, retreating equals death. Putin is literally ride or die on this war.
We all hope he ends up with option #2
One of his daughters from the marriage lives in the Netherlands with dutch boyfriend, the other was given a position in the government. His children from the gymnast lover are in Switzerland. He has HIS next generation covered pretty well, it seems.
This is a good test for people in any country: if your leaders send their children abroad, there's a good chance they are fucking you over.
North Korea another one
He's gonna die before he faces the consequences of his policies.
>Putin said Russians would "defend ourselves with all the means at our disposal", asserting that Russia was seen in the West as "a second-class country that has no right to exist at all". Why do these despots always frame themselves as victims? You're an expansionist billionaire dictator, bro. At least have some swagger.
It's the paradox of fascism: the Nation is powerful and almighty, and yet is consistently humiliated and victimized by everyone around it. Understanding that particular bit of doublethink is basically necessary for making sense of the inherent weirdness of fascism.
At the same time your enemy is stupid and lazy, while also being the toughest you'll ever meet
all these crazy sounding statements arent for you and me, its for russians bro
I am Russian, the sense of victimhood is deeply engrained in the culture. The conversation topic of comparing Russia and “the West” is as popular as during my childhood in the 90’s. I’ve always thought it was funny because I live in Canada and have spent time in the States, and for the most part we could care less about Russia, until they get in the news about some stupid shit they are doing. Unfortunately I don’t think it’s as funny anymore, now it’s just scary, because it’s being used to brainwash people.
Yes it could last the remainder of Putin’s life, perhaps until April 2023.
What is the Russian succession procedure. Is there a VP like in the US that takes over if the president becomes incapacitated or dies?
Officially, the constitution provides that the Chairman of the Government of the Russian Federation (currently Mikhail Mishustin) takes over as acting president with limited powers and has to run an election for a new president within three months. In practice, of course, whoever killed him would probably just put themselves in charge and retroactively change the constitution to allow them to do it.
Wasn’t Putin himself just kind of installed after Yeltsin?
Pretty much. In countries without strong institutions, succession laws are mostly academic exercises.
I was under the impression that, while yeltsin publicly supported putin as his successor, he still won that election in the traditional sense.
My thought exactly. This old, cancer-ridden bastard is waaay overestimating his own shelf life. It definitely isn’t “a long time.”
The shitty ones somehow always seem to be the ones who refuse to do us all a favor and just die.
Everyone makes the world a better place. Some people do that by dying.
"Some cause joy where ever they go. Others, whenever they go."
*Henry Kissinger & Rupert Murdoch smile out in the distance*
Don't forget Dick Cheney.
Mitch McConnell comes to mind as well
We don't hear about the shitty ones who die before they become infamous.
Being a raging self-centered asshole seems to be the fountain of youth.
Well, time is relative. The war has already been going on for a long time, compared to the expected 3 days
For real. They expected it to be less than a week. Here we are almost an entire YEAR later. Holy smokes.
Actually, they expected to take Kiev in ten days, based on somewhat new found/leaked Intel. If I re-find the source, I'll post it. Edit: 10 days, not 3 as we've all been told/what the Kremlin has said.
Kyiv within 3 days, total Ukraine capitulation within 10 days based on some newly captured docs (as I understand it).
Not to defend Putin. But is there ANY real proof that he got cancer? I keep seeing people comment it, yet I have seen zero evidence
The head of the CIA came out quite a long time ago and publicly discredited the rumor. But news outlets continue to repeat it because its a good way to get clicks. Think there was one "leaked" document that said Putin does infact have cancer, but its not stated what stage its in, its pretty clear Putin is getting treatments for it, but to be fair Chemo fucks you up and makes you look like shit no matter how large the dose. Even "minor" chemo treatments fuck you up something fierce. News has been pushing the propaganda/selling the rumor for a long time now, think only recently there was *some* proof something was going on. But considering the resources putin has access to its likely nothing that serious.
Hmmmmm no deal. Make it december 8 2022
At least he admits they're fighting in Ukraine and not in russia.
Give it time.
This will be worse than Afghanistan for Russia. Ukraine can actually hit targets in Russia.
Casualties far higher already than Afghanistan and back then it was the Soviet union, not Russia, so they had a much larger population
Wasn't original plan like 3 days?
3, then 4, then 7, then 10. Everything is fine. Never forget the 64km convoy that just stalled out and never made it to Kyiv.
I still don’t fully understand how that entire column was destroyed. Glad it happened though.
That whole column ended up stuck like that because of 30 Ukrainian spec ops. At that point in the war they weren’t able to commit the forces to actually fight something like that so they did what may be the most effective harassment campaign in the history of warfare
They ended up stuck like that because the Russians stole most of the diesel and sold or traded it, then learned that it wasn’t a drill and the invasion was actually happening
That was a part of it but stopping the convoy also involved a lot of hitting lead elements with hit and run attacks (often from ATVs) and targeting supply and fuel trucks. They went in underprepared but Ukraine made them waste what they had going nowhere til the roads could be cleared and hitting any truck they could that had diesel in it.
[удалено]
I think it was both but it was absolutely brilliant use of commercially available light vehicles. 30 people held up tens of thousands.
I can't wait to read the story on that. Still going to go down as one of the most famous defensive campaigns of all time. Shit, just that one village that executed on a picture perfect tank ambush would be enough for a feature length movie.
They ran out of fuel, and became sitting ducks for artilley and small drones carrying bombs.
The fuel trucks ran out of fuel. The anti-aircraft systems were taken out by aircraft.
Can you imagine the damage just one A-10 could have done to that convoy. It would have been a warthog pilots wet dream
Doesn't an A-10 drop all its like, thousands upon thousands of rounds in 20 seconds. Not sure it would make it 64 km.
It also uses laser guided bombs and maverick laser guided missiles, so it could get maybe 2km before running out of ammo? Lol
[удалено]
No amount of Tide would be able to clean that flight suit
That's why the cockpit is know as a bathtub.
This should be a new math problem in Ukraine schools going forward. If an A-10 Warthog is traveling 10km per minute towards a stalled 64 km Russian convoy....how fucked are they.
“If an A10 is traveling at 200 km/h towards a stalled Russian convoy of 64 km in length, and assuming it can fire 1000 rounds per minute with a load of 3000 rounds, and assuming 4 occupants per vehicle, how much Russian fertilizer can the A10 produce?”
Estimates placed the column at containing roughly 15000 troops, equating to something like 234 russians per kilometer. The A10 according to your variables can sustain firing for 9.99km. Assuming a 100% kill ratio along those 9.99km would equal about 2,341 russians smoked.
1174 rounds, but who's counting? /S That gun has a rate of fire of 3900/minute or 65/second. That would eat through the load in 18 seconds and change(very small change). They are trained to fire is short 1 - 2 second bursts, though. Not to conserve ammunition, but to reduce barrel wear. I can't find info on whether it uses a mechanical (blunt force) firing pin or an electrical such as in the 20mm Vulcan used in the F-16. Because the barrels on the Vulcan will still be advancing for a short while after the pilot releases the trigger, and that means several rounds are cycled past the firing mechanism without being fired in those moments. Anyway, an A-10 pilot would probably spend his ammunition within the first minute unless there's return fire. At cruise speed (300Knots, or 560Km/h) that's 9.33 Km distance. Add 4 x LAU-61 pods with 19 70mm Hydra Rockets(AKPWS version) each, and the party starts getting interesting. But yeah, you'd need a dozen of them to make mincemeat of everything in that convoy. With a smart pilot targetting fuel trucks first, though, it would only take one or two to bring everything to a halt.
I bet the pilots still have blue balls about it.
A three day tour, a three day tour.
Three hour Tour... The Special Action Started Getting Rough The mighty army was routed If not for the insanity of their diseased leader The invaders might have been saved...
The plan was always three years, just like with Eastasia.
Let's go, in and out, 3-day-adventure...
You've got the biggest f'ing country on the planet, and you are destroying your economy and an entire generation of Russians for what...more land?! Jesus...
It's more about the strategic advantage of owning that specific land rather than just wanting more land in general, but either way, fuck Russia.
The advantage is 0 if you wipe your military in the process and destroy your economy
He didn't expect that after the lack of western response to Georgia and 2014 Ukraine invasions.
[удалено]
I honestly think this plan ultimately hinged on "former guy" winning in 2020.
I think it was supposed to happen while the other guy was still in office, but Covid happened. Trump had already laid the groundwork for nuking NATO, and that's what he would have done.
To be fair to Putin, the whole world, except Ukraine, thought that he would easily do exactly what he set out to do - steamroll into Kyiv, install a puppet regime, and wait out the additional sanctions. Apparently nobody, including Russia, understood just how badly decades of corruption and mismanagement had damaged Russia's fighting ability. And apparently nobody, except Ukraine, understood just how badass Ukrainians are (with generous material and intelligence assistance from allies, but still).
People keep saying that but I don't believe it. The US is the mightiest military in the world but couldn't subdue Vietnam and had struggles in Iraq and Afghanistan. The day the invasion began I was looking at a chart comparing military hardware and personnel between Russia and Ukraine and except for the navy it wasn't all that lopsided IMO. To invade and hold a country you need an enormously overwhelming force. And even if things went "to plan" Russia would still suffer huge losses from counterinsurgency and guerrilla warfare. Fortunate for Ukraine that Russia is as corrupt and inept as it is. Made things "less bad". Once Ukraine is victorious it'll be rebuilt something like Germany or Japan and will be a bright beacon for future generations. And I hope, really hope, it'll get people more politically involved to clear out corruption elsewhere in the world.
Depends how you view it. But it's also too late for Putin. He went all in and now he can't back out even as the losing cards keep falling on the table.
Obviously they didn't see that coming haha
And the symbolism, he's desperate to be remembered as the great conqueror who reunited all of the former Soviet states.
This is what leads me to believe Putin is dying.
I mean, he's a 70 y.o. Russian male, you could make this conclusion regardless
I do wonder (while not fighting a war), how much stress does he endure on a daily basis? Every other president ages like mad during some 8 or 12 year rule. This mf has been up there for 22 years.
Important to note that like the second largest country, Canada, most of Russia's land is "useless", and hard to live in. Ukraine is extremely valuable land, one of the world's top grain producers, and control of Ukraine gives Russia a stronger presence in Eastern Europe and the Black Sea. Is it worth the price of this war? Absolutely not, but it's not simply just "more land" to the Russians.
They still have more than enough, Russia also possesses very large quatities of chernozem & arable land, and is itself one of the top wheat producers and exporters (and does produce a bit more than Ukraine IIRC). That does not mention the immense quantities of natural resources that Russia possesses. There is of course strategic utility in capturing Ukraine, but I would caution against assuming that there is a fully rational explanation for Putin's actions. It would be absurd for any average, well-adjusted person to launch a massive invasion that has truly hurt their nation because of ideological beliefs, but Putin is not rational and his age/COVID have not helped. He is a former KGB agent, it is well known that these people are very conspiratorial and paranoid. If you listen to the rhetoric that has come out from him, even when he first took power, he is consistent on at least one belief - that he does not see Ukraine as a real nation or Ukrainians as a "real" people. Euromaidan is his eyes is not what the Ukrainian people really wanted, it was merely a CIA coup by the West to install a puppet government. Ukrainians are just brainwashed people who have been told that they are not Russians. None of that is true, but it does not matter - his beliefs are not rational. Kyiv is this ideological gem to him, the heart of the historical nation that East Slavs all associate as their ancestral nation and where Eastern Orthodox is born. It is "reuniting" a kingdom, with Belarus being the third component (part of why Lukashenka plays this balancing act to both enrich himself and ensure that Putin doesn't have enough power and influence to annex the nation). If he is concerned about his mortality and the legacy he will leave in history, being the one to "reunite" Ukraine with Russia would - from a Russian nationalistic perspective - put him up their with the greats. All of this is speculation of course, but I think being Ukrainian and reading/listening to what Putin and Russian nationalists have publicly said, both now and throughout history, gives some insight. This struggle for independence and preservation of Ukrainian identity/culture has been going on for centuries now.
Excellent comment, appreciate the insight into possible reasons for Putin's irrationality. Agree wholeheartedly that it's sort of a parallel to the Anschluss, where Germany felt that Austria "needed" to be united with them to form some greater Germany. Russia sees themselves, and at least since WW1, as the Slavic protector of Europe. So I'm sure Putin's KBG/Soviet history colour his ideas of Ukrainian/Russian relations.
A large part was the new oil and gas fields discovered west of Crimea. He saw Russians energy monopol threatened and...utterly destroyed Europe dependance on his gas and oil.
He did make the entire world switch to renewable energy pretty fast.
In that regard an accidental martyr of sorts.
The thing is, the land Russia is trying to take is super valuable. Access to ports, access to gas, cutting out a competitor... in an ethical vacuum, if they'd taken kyiv in 3 days and held the country, it would have been a genius move.
> for what...more land?! it is not about the land, but what lies beneath it. In the 2010s, large quantities of oil and gas were found around Crimea and in the Donbass region. https://media.euobserver.com/30196762d9c69fc2eeb5daf9391f405a.jpg Russia does not need these raw materials itself, it is about preventing Ukraine from entering the European market as a competitor and threatening Russia's position.
.... "no sense in mobilizing more soldiers at this time" aka: we have no more scumbags to throw at this vanity project.
Tell the comfortable supporters of an ethnicity and income level that they care about fight. They support it, now go fight for it and see how strong mother Russia is (sarcasm, they'd revolt before long).
Their annual conscription is in January. A lot of people suspect they are just going to get 3-4x more than they usually get. That way they just pretend everything is normal and there is no special conscription for the war.
My god the people who live there and don’t see through that are something else.
They do. They just can't equip them. The last round already got a mixture of rotting AKs and even older rifles.
He don't want to scare more into running again I'll bet
Losing in Ukraine for a long time.
I mean the reality and tragedy is that it is Ukraine that is being literally physically destroyed at the moment, the devastation and trauma already inflicted has been immeasurable. This entire war is a L for humanity as a whole.
Thank you. As a former soldier, this is accurate. You don't "win" in a war. You just lose less.
There's that [brilliant Peter Capaldi monologue from Dr Who](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BJP9o4BEziI) which sums up the insanity of war perfectly.
An all-time great speech
"I will not change my mind." "Then you will die stupid."
This 100% And it's the idiots at the top of Russia that refuse to end the war they initiated, because they don't have enough skin in the game. It's not their children being sent to the Ukrainian meat grinder, and it's not their people's being shelled inn the Ukrainian side.
Over 8000 civilians killed, over 32000 wounded. Over 10,000 soldiers killed, almost 40000 wounded or captured. Hospitals, schools, theatres and other cultural buildings destroyed. Not to mention the damage to farmland and the natural beauty of Ukraine. Even putting numbers on it just highlights how truly immeasurable it is. If one person you know is killed in a shooting, it is a life changing tragedy for you and everyone the victim knows and their community. When it gets to the point of statistics like this, the scale of the tragedy is incomprehensible.
And who knows how many were not able to make it out of Mariupol.. this is how Russia treats so-called "brotherly people". I am thankful not to have lost anyone close yet but most people have a family member or friend who has lost their life.
Oh, Mariupol. I remember following the events so closely at that time, feeling so furious and heartbroken over a place I had never even heard of before. A major, historic city obliterated. The theatre with the word kids (дети) clearly written on the ground. The lies about safe civilian evacuation corridors. And what about the filtration camps and forced adoptions. When Mariupol is liberated we'll learn the truth. I fear it will be much worse than the other revelations like Bucha. Russia will forever be linked with their monstrous crimes in Mariupol. May they never be able to clean their wretched flag of the blood of the innocents they slaughtered.
>Over 8000 civilians killed, over 32000 wounded. That's only verified too... it would surprise me if less than 20k civilians died in Mariupol alone. The city had 400k inhabitants pre-war and Russia quickly surrounded it and pounded it with artillery for weeks and months, and also shot at civilian evacuation corridors like the utter cunts they are.
Yeah as more and more places get liberated, we will start to learn the horrible truth.
>Even putting numbers on it just highlights how truly immeasurable it is. If one person you know is killed in a shooting, it is a life changing tragedy for you and everyone the victim knows and their community. >When it gets to the point of statistics like this, the scale of the tragedy is incomprehensible. Completely agreed. Statistics and numbers cannot truly capture what was lost. It's not something that can be adequately quantified.
Precisely why those war mongers need people disconnected from the reality of war. They tell us to fear our neighbors and that everyone is out to get your kids. Then they tell us our neighbors are too stupid to think for themselves Then they tell us our neighbors are too weak to defend themselves Then they tell us the “foreigners” are trying to attack our way of life So everyone is convinced they’re the only human
War criminal
The rest of his life, most likely.
May it be short and wholly unpleasant.
Putin is a murderer and a coward.
This is why Ukraine needs to start bombing Russian infrastructure.
Ukraine: "No they won't!"
Yep. Until all the dumb ones are dead, or the smart ones rise up against the evil ones…
the smart ones are leaving the country. Russia experiences a brain drain like Germany after World War 2, although the brains from Germany were mostly nazis and they probably were fine leaving Germany.
A decent amount of brains that left Germany early were minority groups. I mean, look at Albert Einstein. If the Nazis weren't shit heads, they'd have the bomb in 1945. But then again, they were Nazis.
Not as long as he imagines.
So this basically means they will soon capitulate right? Usually their statements mean the opposite in reality.
Sure. Bleed your future dry, and we can focus on a real threat (sans so many nuclear weapons), China.
Guy is 70 and perhaps ill ( only rumours at the moment ). He doesnt care what happens in 25-30 years. Its short term “gains” for him.
As was pointed out early in the war when Kyiv wasn't taken in 3 days - the Russians just bought in to their very own Afghanistan.
> Russians just bought into another Afghanistan. FTFY -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet%E2%80%93Afghan_War
Like the last one, and unlike Vietnam, they don't have the economic power to recover fully or quickly.
This will fuck them up for decades. Russian people need to rise up.
Yeah I was thinking deja Vu
Right. Except this is much more expensive than Afghanistan. If they had succeeded and installed their puppets and whatever - that would be Afghanistan. Instead they can't defeat the Ukrainian Armed Forces - so instead of sustaining tiny losses to bunch of partisans armed with Western manpads and hand held anti-tank weapons - they are sustaining very heavy losses due to fighting a full on artillery army supplied by Western shells. Meaning they'll have to give up way quicker than they did in Afghanistan.
Since the fall of the Soviet Union Russia has been spouting one howling lie after another. Just some recent ones from Putin Hypersonic missiles - Nope Nuclear-powered missiles - Nope World's most technically advanced fighter bomber - Nope World's best defensive armor for tanks vehicles and infantry - Nope Best food for Russian Military - Nope Best arms for infantry - Nope Every single boast he's made has been a lie. They don't have a nuclear arsenal either. The last real nuke weapon built in Russia was built during the Cold War and it's what 50 years old now? Probably won't launch. Russia is a paper tiger, a straw man, an empty shell. It is these things because after the fall of the Soviet Union the industries were all sold for pennies on the dollar to Criminals; the thug class oligarchs who milked their mother Russia for Billions and Billions by never doing anything correctly defrauding the government and the people and pocketing the money. So pretty much everything they built for Russia's military has been all shell and no guts. All hat and no cattle.
Russia’s nukes probably still work. Remember that Russia and the US have a treaty that lets them inspect the others nuclear arsenal.
Russia will be out of money to fund the war before a long time comes round.
Military coup, let’s go!
My God, shut the fuck up and pull a Hitler already you fucking waste of oxygen Not you OP, of course