When answering any question with 'No", gets someone sacked, or worse, the answer they give will almost always be yes, even if that's false.

quote:

Originally posted by sse:
If half of what is reported is true, doesn't paint a very good picture. And Putin didn't see this coming? More surprising still.

quote:

Originally posted by chellim1:
Larry C. Johnson: "The Ukrainian Army Has Been Defeated. What's Left Is Mop-Up"

https://www.lewrockwell.com/20...hats-left-is-mop-up/

I call BS on this one

quote:

Originally posted by PASig:
Sounds like the Germans are afraid of pissing off the Russians too much here:


Germany has delivered only 500 of the 2,700 Strela anti-aircraft missiles it promised to Ukraine in early March to help shore up its defenses against the Russian invasion, Welt am Sonntag revealed.



Maybe German SF member Banshee can give his take?

The problem with these is they're (of course) ex-East German stocks, so at least 33 years old at this point. They were actually used for training purposes by the army of united Germany in lieu of Stinger warshots until the remainder were deadlined in 2012 over microfractures in the propellant charges leading to corrosion/oxidation. On another board someone commented that their warranty lifetime is 20 years which can be extended twice by five years each after appropriate inspection.

I'm not sure whether the entire remaining stock failed such an inspection ten years ago already, or the whole lot was declared unsafe over a substantial share that was found faulty, and the 500 were deemed still more dangerous for the target than the user upon recent examination, considering the national emergency faced by Ukraine. At any rate news from today is that additional Strelas will be sent; maybe it's just typical German overmeticulousness in checking them, maybe Ukraine said "screw user safety, we'll take our chances", maybe the German government got fed up with the constant nagging for more deliveries and went "here you got them, but don't blame us when you blow yourself up with them".

It has to be said that the tone of the Ukrainian ambassador to Germany in particular hasn't been completely helpful since before the Russian invasion kicked off; as a rule, calling senior representatives of the governing coalition who actually took a clear stance against Russia assholes will not promote your demands to be supplied with weapons by the same government. However, there is indeed some irritation about the pace of deliveries not just from German army stocks (which obviously need to serve national needs, too), but authorization of new exports from industry; though domestic partisanship certainly plays a role in that debate, too.

quote:

Originally posted by Tirod:
It's assumed they will actually travel across the world and arrive there.

Arms in transit to war zones are considered contraband by at least one side who has the right in the International laws of warfare to keep them from getting there. If they can legally ship in the first place. There is a law called ITAR American enforces - it's how 3D printer programs were being prohibited from being sent around for use, or guns to terrorists. It will be interesting to see guns from America actually make it legally - because that will be a precedent gun importers here will take to court.

Same with all that ammo being taken out of the American market place.

What airport or harbor does it have to get to, and once there, what armored bunker impervious to air strikes will it sit in before getting shipped out on what bomb proof truck to be distributed - where?

and who would want them? Not even the Israeli arms dealers loading up on all the Canadian arms and American stingers showing up - which won't last long. Those are going to wind up in Europe - 2 million combat aged men who moved into France and Germany aren't going to stick to just burning down churches. Nope, they will eventually launch jihad. It's what they do.

You are watching the destabilization of Europe by AMERICA itself - second hand yet paid for by you and me. Don't think so - where did the million M16's wind up we left in Vietnam, crated and stacked in a Saigon warehouse.

Central America.

What comes around goes around. This is on Biden's watch.

Links/sources please.

https://youtu.be/24AuL2v1O_o

quote:

Originally posted by PASig:

quote:

Originally posted by chellim1:
Larry C. Johnson: "The Ukrainian Army Has Been Defeated. What's Left Is Mop-Up"

https://www.lewrockwell.com/20...hats-left-is-mop-up/

I call BS on this one

I have no idea what is actually happening in Ukraine. Both combatants are corrupt. I am waiting to see who the actual "winner" in that area is. I believe we will know by the end of 2023.

quote:

Originally posted by chellim1:
Larry C. Johnson: "The Ukrainian Army Has Been Defeated. What's Left Is Mop-Up"

https://www.lewrockwell.com/20...hats-left-is-mop-up/

Does that dumbfuck seriously make the comparison between the German army taking 7 weeks to reach Kiev in Operation Barbarossa? The Germans had to transit more than 350 miles, the Russians barely had to go 90 as they launched from Belarus.

Also, logistical trains back then were horse drawn, not motorized… and the Russians still haven’t reached Kiev.

quote:

Originally posted by PASig:
I call BS on this one

Did you read the interview... or just the headline?
What part is BS?

quote:

Originally posted by leavemebe:
I have no idea what is actually happening in Ukraine. Both combatants are corrupt. I am waiting to see who the actual "winner" in that area is. I believe we will know by the end of 2023.

Yeah, I agree. This will probably drag on...
But what we are getting is plenty of propaganda.
And we've (US, State Dept.) been involved in the corruption since at least 2014, probably 2008.
Biden is attempting to cover corruption that has benefited him personally.

quote:

I am shocked at the miscalculation in thinking economic sanctions on Russia would bring them to their knees. The opposite is true. Russia is self-sufficient and is not dependent on imports. Its exports are critical to the economic well-being of the West. If they withhold wheat, potash, gas, oil, palladium, finished nickel and other key minerals from the West, the European and U.S. economies will be savaged. And this attempt to coerce Russia with sanctions has now made it very likely that the U.S. dollar’s role as the international reserve currency will show up in the dustbin of history.

It seems to me there are going to a lot of shocked people when they wake up one day and find that Ukraine doesn't exist anymore.

quote:

Originally posted by reloader-1:
Does that dumbfuck seriously make the comparison between the German army taking 7 weeks to reach Kiev in Operation Barbarossa? The Germans had to transit more than 350 miles, the Russians barely had to go 90 as they launched from Belarus.

Also, logistical trains back then were horse drawn, not motorized… and the Russians still haven’t reached Kiev.

Exactly.

Despite the PR of the "lightning-fast motorized/mechanized Blitzkrieg", the German military's advance into the Soviet Union was primarily on foot, with horse-drawn logistics trains.

I don’t get why Russia wants to be a vassal state to China. It seems like a bitch move to me. But then again if you study their history Russia more or less has yet to have a single good ruler.

Russia’s history, much like it’s climate is pretty damn depressing.

quote:

The Germans had to transit more than 350 miles, the Russians barely had to go 90 as they launched from Belarus.
Also, logistical trains back then were horse drawn, not motorized… and the Russians still haven’t reached Kiev.

You have a point there but I think the main point of that paragraph is that when a 24 mile convoy (or 40 mile, depends on the news source) was positioned north of Kiev for more than a week, it should have been a sitting duck. It should have been destroyed. That did not happen.

quote:

Originally posted by chellim1:

quote:

Originally posted by PASig:
I call BS on this one

Did you read the interview... or just the headline?
What part is BS?

TL;DR: If all the Russians have to do is mop up, then why are they stuck along the periphery of Ukraine next to areas the Russians control? Why aren't the Russians simply mopping up rather than shipping in outdated equipment and boasting of hiring Syrian mercenaries?

Does someone really have to go line by line through this shotgun blast of crap to debunk it? Or are you even prepared to defend it (having posted it) rather than quickly scuttling under the couch and claiming that you just put it up for anyone interested?

1. The Ukrainians are still flying sorties - so there is, objectively speaking, no "no fly zone" imposed by the Russians over Ukraine. As for Russia not having to curtail air operations, all sides are reporting two things consistently -
- Russians are having to fly very low to avoid missiles and thus become subject to ground-based attacks that they would not at ordinary operating altitudes
- Russian missile attacks are launched from Russian bombers over the Black Sea rather than over Ukraine

2. Russia may have forced a column into Ukraine and near Kiev in the first three days, but since then that column has stopped and utterly failed to encircle Kiev. The Ukrainians are plausibly claiming that elements of the column have been under constant small-scale ground and drone attacks rather than artillery strikes, which makes sense since the column has counter-battery radar to take out artillery, since the column hasn't moved despite Russia's having constantly said it was in the process of encircling Kiev, and since Ukrainians have documented that their counterattacks have succeeded in pushing the column back and away from Kiev. The same is also true of attacks on Kiev from the east.

As for the Javelins? Ukrainian strategy since the start has been to concentrate on supply columns closer to the Russian and Belarussian borders rather than attack columns. By all accounts, this strategy has enjoyed success.

3. The initial attacks did scoop up some territory for the Russians, but subsequent attacks have either gained ground very slowly (Mariupol still hasn't been taken, has it?) and in some cases were nullified by counterattacks.

I would point out a pretty common error a lot of people are taking. Where many maps show Russians controlling large areas, they only actually control the roads but show no evidence of controlling large areas around those roads.

I would also point out that Ukraine has consistently relied on a strategy of "shoot'n'scoot", so it's silly to put much stock in Ukraine not initiating unit-to-comparable-unit fights; they'd be spending resources that experience has shown them can be deployed more efficiently.

All in all, none of what has happened justifies this guy's assertion that what Russia has accomplished should somehow "scare the hell out of U.S. military and political leaders".

4. If the media is just spinning a propaganda campaign rather than reporting the cruel facts, then why have we not heard anything to the contrary from foreign media, the US DoD, China or Russia itself? Instead the reporting that we're hearing from all sides is consistent - the Russians are stalling out or losing more often than they're winning.

5. If Russia is "self-sufficient and is not dependent on imports", then why are their tank production lines and efforts to expand oilfields for sales already committed to the People's Republic of China now stalled out for lack of parts and personnel with relevant expertise, why have even salt and sugar disappeared from Russian grocery store shelves, and why haven't the Russians made a point of showcasing how they're meeting their own needs without imports? It's not as though the West has been effectively cut off from access to RT.

6. Do we really have to debunk the whole "the West has been provoking Russia with NATO expansion"? It's been debunked several times over already, and Johnson offers absolutely no evidence that it's true.

7. I won't even bother with that horse manure about Zelenskyy being a power grabber who's in bed with the Nazis. IOW, you're welcome to re-read what I wrote in No. 6 above.

Now, what evidence is there that all Russia needs to do is 'mop up'? Even Johnson doesn't provide any evidence of that beyond insisting that since Ukraine's fixed radar locations were taken out early (as anyone's would be in modern warfare), Ukraine (per Johnson) has somehow already lost. Honestly, man, posting that interview was just trolling.

quote:

"The Ukrainian Army Has Been Defeated. What's Left Is Mop-Up"

It's not a good headline. But it seems to me that the Ukrainian Army is largely scattered and fighting a guerrilla type war. I'm not sure they are capable, at this point of defeating and throwing out the Russians.

Don't get me wrong, I'm glad the Ukrainians are fighting and I hope they are able to win. Also, they have obviously done much better than the Russians anticipated. I just wouldn't get my hopes up that they will drive the Russians out completely.

In the end, there will probably be a bifurcation of the country at some point. The author seems to think that Ukraine will eventually be partitioned along the Dnieper River “and south along the coast that holds a majority ethnic Russian population.”

This whole thing is rather complicated. It's much more than Zelenskyy good; Putin bad. I just don't think the US should be drawn in or getting more involved, whether through NATO or otherwise.

quote:

Despite the PR of the "lightning-fast motorized/mechanized Blitzkrieg", the German military's advance into the Soviet Union was primarily on foot, with horse-drawn logistics trains.

^^^^^^^^^
You are quite correct. The Germans at D-Day were impressed at the mechanization of the Americans, while they still used horses.

quote:

Originally posted by chellim1:
But it seems to me that the Ukrainian Army is largely scattered and fighting a guerrilla type war. I'm not sure they are capable, at this point of defeating and throwing out the Russians.

It seems like the idea was always going to be that the Russians got bled to death.

quote:

But, in the end, there will probably be a bifurcation of the country at some point. The author seems to think that Ukraine will eventually be partitioned along the Dnieper River “and south along the coast that holds a majority ethnic Russian population.”

I can see how that might happen, but that would also all too obviously reset the stage for another massive armed confrontation. The only real roads to peace are for Russians to seize Ukraine or return to their side of the 2010 borders.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Il Cattivo,

quote:

Originally posted by chellim1:


...I'm glad the Ukrainians are fighting and I hope they are able to win. Also, they have obviously done much better than the Russians anticipated.

Indeed.

But the reality is it's not even close.

Again, there are going to be lots and lots of people it seems who will be utterly shocked when, *poof*, Ukraine is suddenly non-existent.

quote:

The only real roads to peace are for Russians to seize Ukraine or return to their side of the 2010 borders.

I just don't see that happening. The Ukrainians will not be completely subdued, nor will the Russians leave without being able to claim some sort of victory.


Newsweek Shift – Maybe Putin Not So Bad, He Could Devastate Ukraine, but Putin Is Holding Back

Well, this is weird. After weeks of the horrible Putin narrative, Newsweek softens the tone, perhaps sees a larger landscape where Russia is working strategically though a plan and says, “Putin’s Bombers Could Devastate Ukraine but He’s Holding Back.” Wait, what?

According to the anonymous Newsweek sources – intelligence officials who fear speaking publicly for fear of severe repercussions – it would be very easy for Vladimir Putin to level the key cities and industries in Ukraine, but he’s not doing it.

The strategy Newsweek is seemingly beginning to admit is the same strategy Col Douglas Macgregor has been speaking about.

(Newsweek) – As destructive as the Ukraine war is, Russia is causing less damage and killing fewer civilians than it could, U.S. intelligence experts say.

Russia’s conduct in the brutal war tells a different story than the widely accepted view that Vladimir Putin is intent on demolishing Ukraine and inflicting maximum civilian damage—and it reveals the Russian leader’s strategic balancing act. […] Understanding the thinking behind Russia’s limited attacks could help map a path towards peace, experts say.

In nearly a month since Russia invaded, dozens of Ukrainian cities and towns have fallen, and the fight over the country’s largest cities continues. United Nations human rights specialists say that some 900 civilians have died in the fighting (U.S. intelligence puts that number at least five times UN estimates). About 6.5 million Ukrainians have also become internally displaced (15 percent of the entire population), half of them leaving the country to find safety.

“The destruction is massive,” a senior analyst working at the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) tells Newsweek, “especially when compared with what Europeans and Americans are used to seeing.”

But, the analyst says, the damage associated with a contested ground war involving peer opponents shouldn’t blind people to what is really happening. (The analyst requested anonymity in order to speak about classified matters.) “The heart of Kyiv has barely been touched. And almost all of the long-range strikes have been aimed at military targets.” (read more)

What the article boils down to is an acceptance, albeit couched in the U.S/NATO narrative, that Vladimir Putin is working through a careful and methodical plan to eliminate –with extreme prejudice– one severe faction of the Ukraine military (Azov battalion Nazis), and yet carefully and surgically leave intact the areas of greatest population.

The capture of Ukraine, with as little damage as possible, while eliminating the elements with the connections to western government manipulation, appears to be the process. This, in addition to the removal of the Zelenskyy government, is what Macgregor has been pointing out from the beginning.

Putin seemingly plans to rebuild most of eastern Ukraine (closest to Russia) where a civil war has been ongoing for over a decade. That region is also the location of the most ultranationalist of the Ukraine forces, so the military targeting has been severe in that area.

With the sanctions and western intelligence efforts of the State Dept./CIA, and western economic group appearing to have little impact, perhaps the media is starting to realize the conflict in Ukraine is more complex and thought out than fits the current western media narrative.

https://theconservativetreehou...ng-back/#more-230499

quote:

Originally posted by Balzé Halzé:

quote:

Originally posted by chellim1:


...I'm glad the Ukrainians are fighting and I hope they are able to win. Also, they have obviously done much better than the Russians anticipated.

Indeed.

But the reality is it's not even close.

Again, there are going to be lots and lots of people it seems who will be utterly shocked when, *poof*, Ukraine is suddenly non-existent.

Considering I thought that would happen a couple of weeks ago, I'm impressed with their tenacity. I love rooting for the underdog, I hope they pull off a miracle buzzer beater. Even if in the end they do not, Russia will no longer be a B class super power, they will relegated being a former super power.

Not sure which would be better for the Ukrainian people, early surrender and subservience with lives saved or fight to the death. I know which I'd choose even at the odds Ukraine faces. We beat Great Britain against all odds, maybe they do too. The only question is at what cost.

quote:

Originally posted by chellim1:

quote:

"The Ukrainian Army Has Been Defeated. What's Left Is Mop-Up"

It's not a good headline. But it seems to me that the Ukrainian Army is largely scattered and fighting a guerrilla type war. I'm not sure they are capable, at this point of defeating and throwing out the Russians.

....

agree. but it may not be necessary.

estimates for total losses for the Russians (killied / WIA / lost / captive) are approaching 40K and as far as i know they have not 'taken' a single major contested city (separatist areas notwithstanding)

their equipment losses are massive. they are losing leadership -- cols / generals getting outright killed and if not that -- sacked by Putin apparently.

any way you slice it -- Russia badly miscalculated and crafting a suitable endgame is getting more and more problematic.

--------------------------