War Invasion of Ukraine News Megathread - Thread is only for articles and discussion of articles, general discussion thread is still in Happenings.

Status
Not open for further replies.
President Joe Biden on Tuesday said that the United States will impose sanctions “far beyond” the ones that the United States imposed in 2014 following the annexation of the Crimean peninsula.

“This is the beginning of a Russian invasion of Ukraine,” Biden said in a White House speech, signaling a shift in his administration’s position. “We will continue to escalate sanctions if Russia escalates,” he added.

Russian elites and their family members will also soon face sanctions, Biden said, adding that “Russia will pay an even steeper price” if Moscow decides to push forward into Ukraine. Two Russian banks and Russian sovereign debt will also be sanctioned, he said.

Also in his speech, Biden said he would send more U.S. troops to the Baltic states as a defensive measure to strengthen NATO’s position in the area.

Russia shares a border with Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania.

A day earlier, Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered troops to go into the separatist Donetsk and Lugansk regions in eastern Ukraine after a lengthy speech in which he recognized the two regions’ independence.

Western powers decried the move and began to slap sanctions on certain Russian individuals, while Germany announced it would halt plans to go ahead with the Russia-to-Germany Nord Stream 2 pipeline.

At home, Biden is facing bipartisan pressure to take more extensive actions against Russia following Putin’s decision. However, a recent poll showed that a majority of Americans believe that sending troops to Ukraine is a “bad idea,” and a slim minority believes it’s a good one.

All 27 European Union countries unanimously agreed on an initial list of sanctions targeting Russian authorities, said French Foreign Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian, and EU foreign affairs head Josep Borell claimed the package “will hurt Russia … a lot.”

Earlier Tuesday, Borell asserted that Russian troops have already entered the Donbas region, which comprises Donetsk and Lugansk, which are under the control of pro-Russia groups since 2014.

And on Tuesday, the Russian Parliament approved a Putin-back plan to use military force outside of Russia’s borders as Putin further said that Russia confirmed it would recognize the expanded borders of Lugansk and Donetsk.

“We recognized the states,” the Russian president said. “That means we recognized all of their fundamental documents, including the constitution, where it is written that their [borders] are the territories at the time the two regions were part of Ukraine.”

Speaking to reporters on Tuesday, Putin said that Ukraine is “not interested in peaceful solutions” and that “every day, they are amassing troops in the Donbas.”

Meanwhile, Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky on Tuesday morning again downplayed the prospect of a Russian invasion and proclaimed: “There will be no war.”

“There will not be an all-out war against Ukraine, and there will not be a broad escalation from Russia. If there is, then we will put Ukraine on a war footing,” he said in a televised address.

The White House began to signal that they would shift their own position on whether it’s the start of an invasion.

“We think this is, yes, the beginning of an invasion, Russia’s latest invasion into Ukraine,” said Jon Finer, the White House deputy national security adviser in public remarks. “An invasion is an invasion and that is what is underway.”

For weeks, Western governments have been claiming Moscow would invade its neighbor after Russia gathered some 150,000 troops along the countries’ borders. They alleged that the Kremlin would attempt to come up with a pretext to attack, while some officials on Monday said Putin’s speech recognizing the two regions was just that.

But Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin told reporters Tuesday that Russia’s “latest invasion” of Ukraine is threatening stability in the region, but he asserted that Putin can “still avoid a full blown, tragic war of choice.”

Article
 
@AntiSchwuletteAktion At one point in one of your dumps you said Ukraine basically no longer had an air force or air defenses. Can anyone confirm this? If true, then Ukraine is pretty much in the bag, no?
Ukraines airforce didn't stand a chance and their best GBADs were S300s - Soviet era predecessors to the S400s the Russians use - and too few in number to hold off the Russians. In the air it was a done thing before the fighting started, too few in number and too old.

That said: No. MANPADs are still going to be a threat, and will no doubt represent the majority of the air threat that the Russians face. This will allow for the Ukrainians to contest the air somewhat, in addition to this while airpower is important - it really depends on what Russia can achieve once it has air superiority. They're not anywhere near on par with the the US, or Western Nations in terms of capability. While they can match a lot of the tech the West has, they can only do so in limited numbers. Hence, the fact most Russian munitions in Syria weren't smart bombs like the West uses. These are less accurate and therefore less effective, and using them accurately would open you use to MANPADs which would not be able to be used against aircraft using guided standoff munitions as they would be out of range.

If, and this is a big big if, Russia can quickly win then how they will occupy such a large, hostile and well armed landmass is up in the air. I think they would fail ala Afghanistan in the 1980s. If they don't win quickly, then this will become attrition based and that gives Ukraine an opportunity to "no lose", but even if Russia won in that scenario the end game would be the same. A large, well armed landmass full of people who want to shoot you.
 
I haven't checked in since last night, has there been any word on the survival of Azov Battalion?
 
Ukraines airforce didn't stand a chance and their best GBADs were S300s - Soviet era predecessors to the S400s the Russians use - and too few in number to hold off the Russians. In the air it was a done thing before the fighting started, too few in number and too old.

That said: No. MANPADs are still going to be a threat, and will no doubt represent the majority of the air threat that the Russians face. This will allow for the Ukrainians to contest the air somewhat, in addition to this while airpower is important - it really depends on what Russia can achieve once it has air superiority. They're not anywhere near on par with the the US, or Western Nations in terms of capability. While they can match a lot of the tech the West has, they can only do so in limited numbers. Hence, the fact most Russian munitions in Syria weren't smart bombs like the West uses. These are less accurate and therefore less effective, and using them accurately would open you use to MANPADs which would not be able to be used against aircraft using guided standoff munitions as they would be out of range.

If, and this is a big big if, Russia can quickly win then how they will occupy such a large, hostile and well armed landmass is up in the air. I think they would fail ala Afghanistan in the 1980s. If they don't win quickly, then this will become attrition based and that gives Ukraine an opportunity to "no lose", but even if Russia won in that scenario the end game would be the same. A large, well armed landmass full of people who want to shoot you.
Ukraine is to Russia what Poland was to Germany.
 
Last edited:
1645741373118.png

im now waiting for Russia to say Ukraine started a war, because Russia was "just doing military exercises"
 
Ukraine is to Russia what Poland was to Germany.
A good analogy, some historians think had Poland not fell so quickly that the Germans would have been in real trouble as their stocks of ammunition and fuel could have run out. Again, no doubt they would have defeated Poland in the long run anyway, as Russia would against Ukraine, but the cost in materiel and manpower would have been far higher.
 
If there's a draft I'm going to do my hardest to dodge it by claiming I'm a Jew and sending me overseas in the draft would be like 6 millioning me. If that doesn't work and they still send me over, first chance I get I'm defecting and joining Papa Putin.
If there's a draft, I'm not going. Lock my Black ass up then. Ask the LGBTQ community that was so adamant about being in the military.

25372d1b7abc6f715e51c3228ab2e5bf.gif
 
I think it's up in the air whether he can achieve that, the reality is while Ukraine is overmatched in the Air and at Sea, the fact they are fighting a defensive war means that on the ground they are not completely outmatched. Yes, their tanks and mobility will be constrained, but as we have already seen manpads can down attack helicopters - and with less regularity they can also do this to fast-jets - and shoulder fired anti-tank weaponry can be lethal - and against heavier tanks at least score a mission kill by making them U/S. If the Ukrainians can slow them down and hold out in the first instance and devolve this into a war of attrition they might win, or at the very least not lose. If casaulties start mounting, and their hardware starts getting trashed, then we will see how long Russia will want to remain fighting for what? A economic backwater?

Further to this, I fail to see what Putin hopes to achieve. He is almost universally reviled in the vast majority of the Ukraine, and the proliferation of arms and ammunition (and large border with Poland and the black sea which can be used to supply insurgents) would make holding Ukraine in the face of insurgents nigh on impossible in the long run. It would be like 1980's Afghanistan on steroids, and we're not talking about the USSR, but instead the rump of the USSR, and these insurgents are going to have better and closer ties to the West. That war in the 1980's was a major factor in the fall of the USSR, so is Putin really going to be able to achieve in Ukraine what has failed elsewhere?

Putin could easily have peeled off Luhansk and Donetsk, I think all of Ukraine is too big for him to take and hold. Any puppet regime will require his intervention to prevent being toppled.

Finally, the reports on the ground are patchy - unless the most triumphant Russian propaganda is true, this has not been the sort of success you would expect from a military on par with Western forces. Example: Desert Storm 1. The US and Allies took on nation with a far better, much more integrated - not even accounting for the 30 years difference - air defence system which Saddam Hussein's Iraq had, and they did not do this on their doorstep but on the other side of the planet. The air bombardment was far more effective, and once the Allies crossed the line of departure the sort of losses the Russians are having - if these videos I have seen are to be believed - were almost never seen by the Allies, who only lost around 150 soldiers to enemy action. So while I highly doubt NATO will be tangling with the Russians, if they did I wouldn't be too worried about the outcome, unless Putin wanted to rage quit with nuclear weapons.
Add to this Poland does not want a direct border with Russia ever again. Poland is probably the one European Military that Putin cannot simply overwhelm. Any conflict with the Poles will be harsh and bloody for the Russians. Poland does have a large land border with Ukraine. So much so that the Russians will be hard pressed to prevent vast shipments of arms and advisors from Poland. The Poles have been remarkably quiet. Does anyone kniw where their army is right now? Given the history it is quite possible the Poles might choose to fight in Kyiv rather than waiting for the fighting to reack Warsaw yet again.
 
There are rumors that Russia is preparing for an aerial bombardment of Kyiv. Could be an abundance of caution on the Ukrainians' part, since bombing a major civilian population would definitely be a serious escalation of violence.
 
Add to this Poland does not want a direct border with Russia ever again. Poland is probably the one European Military that Putin cannot simply overwhelm. Any conflict with the Poles will be harsh and bloody for the Russians. Poland does have a large land border with Ukraine. So much so that the Russians will be hard pressed to prevent vast shipments of arms and advisors from Poland. The Poles have been remarkably quiet. Does anyone kniw where their army is right now? Given the history it is quite possible the Poles might choose to fight in Kyiv rather than waiting for the fighting to reack Warsaw yet again.
From my limited understanding of pan-European politics - you'll need to ask Carl Benjamin for more details - Poland are vocal Russia Hawks within the EU and have been unhappy with the German stance of becoming more energy dependent on Russia (and the fact Germany refuse to provide any lethal aid because of muh hitler), and have been calling for more drastic sanctions.

I doubt they will openly get involved with direct military support in Ukraine, because NATO is dead set against it - for a while host of unfortunate, but understandable reasons. Since Article 5 is a defensive measure, I have no idea how that would interact with Poland going to support their neighbour and as a result getting in harms way.
 
Add to this Poland does not want a direct border with Russia ever again. Poland is probably the one European Military that Putin cannot simply overwhelm. Any conflict with the Poles will be harsh and bloody for the Russians. Poland does have a large land border with Ukraine. So much so that the Russians will be hard pressed to prevent vast shipments of arms and advisors from Poland. The Poles have been remarkably quiet. Does anyone kniw where their army is right now? Given the history it is quite possible the Poles might choose to fight in Kyiv rather than waiting for the fighting to reack Warsaw yet again.

Yes, this sounds like the actions of a sane and reasonable NATO member state - invading the territory of another country and engaging in military action with Russia there.

Jamie, pull up that satellite scan, show us where Poland's army is!!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back