Russia

[The Phantom]

On 4/1/2023 at 4:19 PM, La_Dolce_Vita said:

Russia didn't go straight in and wipe out Ukraine infrastructure.  Why didn't Russia take down power stations, railways, bridges, water processing, etc. across the country? 

Because initially they seemed to have genuinely thought it would be a relatively peaceful take-over.  

They needed railways and bridges to complete the invasion.  Russian logistics is rail-based.

Once it became evident that it was not going to be a walk in the park, they thought it might take a little longer, but they still wanted to take-over a relatively intact country. 

By the time it became evident they had a real battle on their hands, they did start going for the infrastructure.  But by this point they were low on sophisticated weaponry that can target this and also much of it was guarded by Ground to Air weaponry by this point. 

I heard that as part of Xi's visit to Moscow a couple of weeks ago, Russia agreed with China to not 'significantly escalate' the situation there.  Within a week, Putin and Lukashenko completely disregarded that and announced the stationing of Nuclear weapons in Belarus. 

 

[P.K.]

They are deploying a tactical nuclear presence in the West of Belarus clearly designed to put pressure on Warsaw.

I suspect mainly because NATO logistics for Ukraine come through the country and they make no secret of donating top-notch kit to the Ukrainians.

However Poland is a fully paid up member of NATO and a strike on the country would end up with Belarus glowing in the dark just for starters.

[The Phantom]

[Passing Time]

35 minutes ago, The Phantom said:

wow, what a coincidence...

[La_Dolce_Vita]

On 4/3/2023 at 11:56 AM, The Phantom said:

Because initially they seemed to have genuinely thought it would be a relatively peaceful take-over.  

They needed railways and bridges to complete the invasion.  Russian logistics is rail-based.

Once it became evident that it was not going to be a walk in the park, they thought it might take a little longer, but they still wanted to take-over a relatively intact country. 

By the time it became evident they had a real battle on their hands, they did start going for the infrastructure.  But by this point they were low on sophisticated weaponry that can target this and also much of it was guarded by Ground to Air weaponry by this point. 

I heard that as part of Xi's visit to Moscow a couple of weeks ago, Russia agreed with China to not 'significantly escalate' the situation there.  Within a week, Putin and Lukashenko completely disregarded that and announced the stationing of Nuclear weapons in Belarus. 

 

A peaceful takeover of the Donbas or the north of the country as well? 

What I was meaning is that if the Russians had gone in full force and tried wiping out Ukraine's infrastructure in the centre of the country then the shock and effects of that could really have put the Ukraine in a far more difficult position.  If what Russia was after was annexation of the Donbas and punishment then it would have seemed the better option.  It would have too late for the  heavy NATO support.  

Unless I'm missing something, I'm sceptical of the view that they wanted to take over the WHOLE country.  I can believe plans for Moldova but not so much the Ukraine. If that was planned then how could Russia have got it so wrong in their strategy. If they had wanted to conquer an intact land then doesn't marry up with making it more likely that an invasion is successful.  And then how did Russia plan on holding the country once conquered, as the Ukrainians would continue to fight for years or decades. 

I am not sure what you saying about the nuclear weapons bit. It's possible that China was told about what Russia was planning. Maybe they werent. We don't know. But I am not sure what significance there is to this, as the US is just as duplicitous in its dealings. And the US and Britain are escalating the situation themselves by encouraging the Ukraine to disregard negotiating, as the military support continues and with the introduction of Finland to NATO at this time, and with Sweden next.  I am not surprised that Russia is emboldened to rattle the sable by posturing with these nuclear weapons, as dangerous as that might become.  

 

 

 

[La_Dolce_Vita]

On 4/3/2023 at 12:07 PM, P.K. said:

However Poland is a fully paid up member of NATO and a strike on the country would end up with Belarus glowing in the dark just for starters.

But this is academic, I would hope.  If the use of nuclear weapons, of whatever type, was even a serious consideration by any side in the context of this conflict then all good sense has completely been lost.  It would be madness.

The precedent (and risk of reciprocation) it would set is too dear a price for the world to pay for any nation's or alliance's war aims. 

 

 

[woolley]

2 hours ago, La_Dolce_Vita said:

A peaceful takeover of the Donbas or the north of the country as well? 

What I was meaning is that if the Russians had gone in full force and tried wiping out Ukraine's infrastructure in the centre of the country then the shock and effects of that could really have put the Ukraine in a far more difficult position.  If what Russia was after was annexation of the Donbas and punishment then it would have seemed the better option.  It would have too late for the  heavy NATO support.  

Unless I'm missing something, I'm sceptical of the view that they wanted to take over the WHOLE country.  I can believe plans for Moldova but not so much the Ukraine. If that was planned then how could Russia have got it so wrong in their strategy. If they had wanted to conquer an intact land then doesn't marry up with making it more likely that an invasion is successful.  And then how did Russia plan on holding the country once conquered, as the Ukrainians would continue to fight for years or decades.

You are missing a few things there. Of course they wanted and expected to take the whole of Ukraine, otherwise why would they have had a 35 mile armoured convoy on the road heading for Kyiv on the first morning? They thought they were going in, decapitating the regime and taking over the country in much less than a week. They believed their own rhetoric that they are one people and the population would be happy, or at least acquiescent, under Russian rule. They cocked up.

[The Phantom]

14 hours ago, La_Dolce_Vita said:

A peaceful takeover of the Donbas or the north of the country as well? 

What I was meaning is that if the Russians had gone in full force and tried wiping out Ukraine's infrastructure in the centre of the country then the shock and effects of that could really have put the Ukraine in a far more difficult position.  If what Russia was after was annexation of the Donbas and punishment then it would have seemed the better option.  It would have too late for the  heavy NATO support.  

Unless I'm missing something, I'm sceptical of the view that they wanted to take over the WHOLE country.  I can believe plans for Moldova but not so much the Ukraine. If that was planned then how could Russia have got it so wrong in their strategy. If they had wanted to conquer an intact land then doesn't marry up with making it more likely that an invasion is successful.  And then how did Russia plan on holding the country once conquered, as the Ukrainians would continue to fight for years or decades. 

I am not sure what you saying about the nuclear weapons bit. It's possible that China was told about what Russia was planning. Maybe they werent. We don't know. But I am not sure what significance there is to this, as the US is just as duplicitous in its dealings. And the US and Britain are escalating the situation themselves by encouraging the Ukraine to disregard negotiating, as the military support continues and with the introduction of Finland to NATO at this time, and with Sweden next.  I am not surprised that Russia is emboldened to rattle the sable by posturing with these nuclear weapons, as dangerous as that might become.  

 

 

 

They were going for Kyiv (Hostomel Airport and as @woolley notes had a 30 mile armoured column headed their way) and sent assassination teams after Zelensky.  You don't take the Capital, the East and the South without going whole hog for the full country.  The successful defence of Kyiv by largely suprised and unprepared Ukrainian forces has been one of the greatest successes of the conflict. 

I'm sure the Orcs expected a little resistance, but on the whole likely expected it to be like taking Crimea largely peacefully. 

If you think they want Moldova too, which borders Ukraine, why have an uncontrolled country inbetween when you've taken the Capital.  

Regarding the Chinese and escalation; for sure our western allies are similarly duplicitous sometimes, but we're all in agreement and acting together on this one.  China is basically Russia's only significant 'friend' at the moment.  For them to go against an agreement within days, just demonstrates how few fucks Russia gives and hopefully should piss off the Chinese. 

 

[Bombay Bad Boy]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-65344370

[Passing Time]

4 hours ago, Bombay Bad Boy said:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-65344370

Wonder if the pilot will accidentally fall from a high building...

[offshoremanxman]

Fake drone attack on the Kremlin now. Sounds like Russia is getting very desperate to escalate now. 

[Passing Time]

They've been trying to kill Zelenskiy since this began and now act all outraged because Putin has come under attack... wow, just wow 

[The Phantom]

14 hours ago, offshoremanxman said:

Fake drone attack on the Kremlin now. Sounds like Russia is getting very desperate to escalate now. 

You'd think that if Ukraine were going to try and attack the Kremlin, they'd use something bigger than a Black Cat Firework.

Good to see how effective the Kremlin's anti-air defences are too! 

[Roxanne]

33 minutes ago, The Phantom said:

You'd think that if Ukraine were going to try and attack the Kremlin, they'd use something bigger than a Black Cat Firework.

Good to see how effective the Kremlin's anti-air defences are too! 

I don’t buy any of this. The Kremlin is protected more than anywhere. This is just another excuse to justify more attacks on Ukraine. And that picture? Perfectly taken? My ass. 

[offshoremanxman]

1 hour ago, The Phantom said:

You'd think that if Ukraine were going to try and attack the Kremlin, they'd use something bigger than a Black Cat Firework.

Good to see how effective the Kremlin's anti-air defences are too! 

It just surprises me how stupid they think the Russian people are. And to be honest whether anyone actually gives a shit if he did die in a drone attack.