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
 
Yeah the Starstreaks are going to be the Javelin-game-changing equivalent. Still technically "defensive" weapons platforms but fuck me thats going to fuck some shit up.

The Star Streaks can hit Mach 4 and are the fastest MANPADS in use. They were quite literally designed to fuck up Russian aircraft hitting afterburner.

We've probably sent them out there to check they definitely work.
What's the range for those Starstreak? We know the Russian are being forced to fly low because they're resorting to dumb bomb for whatever reason, but I have a feeling they will use smart bombs for key battles like the upcoming one in Kyiv
 
I'm sorry, but after the shit they did in afganistan and iraq, or hell, even vietnam, It's hard to believe. If we also factor in the huge amount of US-backed Military coups (sucessful or not) and CIA's human experimentation of military personel, pow's, and civilians, and I don't know, man, maybe I am just to cynical about this shit. Despite all that, I do like US more, and I hope if conflict comes (I hope it does not) to US, I hope US wins.
The US in the cold war was far more ruthless, their behaviour in Vietnam and South America was unarguably fucked up beyond belief.

In recent years however less so, even the drone campaign by the CIA in Afghanistan is nowhere nears as bad as the behaviour of the US in Vietnam.

I would say US treatment of non-aligned nations was on par with what the USSR would do during the cold war.

Since then however, the US has become far more judicious in how they behave in combat. Yes, lots died in Iraq - but the majority of these were killed after the Invasion as a result of the civil war there - and Afghanistan - again, most not due to Western forces as far as I can tell. That isn't to say war crimes didn't happen, but it's different if a single soldier, or platoon, go rogue than it being part of their orders. To give two US comparisons, Iraq had some awful torture of prisoners that was due to a failure of the CoC, Vietnam they used to burn villages and food stores as punishment.

Personally, I believe this is because we have an open media. You can't get away with brutal tactics if they are broadcast to your TV back home, people don't like that shit. Increasingly open and ubiquitous coverage of these wars make such behaviour great propaganda, therefore it's advantagous for Western militaries to avoid such actions. It's not because we're nicer necessarily, but because the system we live in holds us to account more - even if that is just via the court of public opinion.
 
Last edited:
And I hate that. I hate that our lives are merely a poitical bitching devices for those god-damned politicians to use and then discard.
That's how politicians act. But hey, the draft's gone for now, so only people who are willing to accept death get signed on to a war. Last war they tried to draft people into (Vietnam) was so unpopular, people were burning draft cards on the street.

So no, unless you signed on to the military, you won't get thrown into a war. That's a far cry from Putin throwing conscripts into the Ukrainian meat grinder.
 
Since then however, the US has become far more judicious in how they behave in combat. Yes, lots died in Iraq - but the majority of these were killed after the Invasion as a result of the civil war there - and Afghanistan - again, most not due to Western forces as far as I can tell. That isn't to say war crimes didn't happen, but it's different if a single soldier, or platoon, go rogue than it being part of their orders.
"most" doesn't mean civilians weren't specifically targeted, like what happened in several operations in Iraq.

Personally, I believe this is because we have an open media. You can't get away with brutal tactics if they are broadcast to your TV back home, people don't like that shit. Increasingly open and ubiquitous coverage of these wars make such behaviour great propaganda, therefore it's advantagous for Western militaries to avoid such actions. It's not because we're nicer necessarily, but because the system we live in holds us to account more - even if that is just via the court of public opinion.
Problem is, a lot of US and EU media are pro-war, and encourage it despite the alleged war crimes commited. They support White House's war, unless they want to end it (remember how media hated Biden when he announced he was planning on ending the Afganistan war? They haven't forgiven him to this day).
(Vietnam) was so unpopular, people were burning draft cards on the street.
And bombing the congress.
That's a far cry from Putin throwing conscripts into the Ukrainian meat grinder.
Or Ukranians not letting their men leave (over 18 ) so they can be conscripted and sent to die against Russia. That aside, I do agree with you, this war is terrible, and fuck everyone who helped it get started.
 
The US can be very sloppy with ROE, and thats not simply a case of "oh well it's just a few people's lives". It's awful, we all agree.

Not withstanding the CIA and their drone campaign in Pakistan/Afghanistan which was far far far too accepting of innocents being caught in the crossfire, the difference in the US and Russia cases are that of recklessness and intent. (Vietnam and burning entire villages to the ground aside).

What I mean is this, the US RoE is sloppy and overly reckless. Too many people die, but in the vast vast majority of cases it's clear the US isn't intentionally targeting the civilian population. With Russia, it seems to be a key part of their doctrine - ala Aleppo, Grozny, Kharkiv, etc - to punish the civilian population. It really looks like the sort of doctrine used back in WWII when area bombing was used.
The US, partially due to being the World Police, has made big strides in running cleaner wars.

I just want to remind everyone that Russia used chemical weapons in Syria and will probably end up using them again against Ukrainian civilians if this doesn't end soon.
 
We've probably sent them out there to check they definitely work
Manufacturers and governments must be creaming their pants at the prospect of all the real world operational data they can gather from this. Plus if shit doesn't work as well as expected it's easy to cove your ass by claiming it' just the inadequate training/operational reality of this particular conflict.
What's the range for those Starstreak?
Depends which version we're sending. Up to 7km for the v1, 7k+ for the upgraded one
I have a feeling they will use smart bombs for key battles like the upcoming one in Kyiv
I'm not so sure we will. Russia has never been particularly good at PGMs, they prefer quantity over quality. Hell Russia has only been in the guided weapon game for less than a decade (they've been practicing in Syria). I'm not sure they'd have enough stockpiles to use in Ukraine.
 

Putin Spokesman Says Russian Economy in ‘Shock’​


Russian government officials on Thursday said its economy is in “shock” after heavy sanctions and after a number of Western corporations pulled out of the country in recent days after the Ukraine conflict.


“Our economy is experiencing a shock impact now and there are negative consequences; they will be minimized,” top Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov told reporters on Thursday.


Peskov, who himself is facing sanctions from the European Union and the United States, again said that while the situation is turbulent, Moscow can take measures to stabilize the country’s economy. He didn’t elaborate.


“This is absolutely unprecedented. The economic war that has started against our country has never taken place before. So it is very hard to forecast anything,” he remarked.


On Tuesday, President Joe Biden announced the United States would ban all Russian oil imports, raising the likelihood of soaring gas prices domestically, over the Ukraine war. And on Wednesday, the European Union announced that it would expand its sanctions on both Russia and Belarus.



Washington’s European allies are, however, more dependent on Russian oil and gas and have held back from sanctioning it.


French Finance Minister Bruno Le Maire told an energy conference it was imperative the economic fallout from the Ukraine war must not lead to 1970s-style stagflation—a combination of high inflation and low growth.


More than 160 Russians, including oligarchs and politicians, as well as the Belarussian banking sector, were sanctioned by the EU, said European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen.


The E.U.’s top diplomat, Josep Borrell, told the European Parliament that the new package included travel bans and asset freezes on some 100 Russians at different levels of government.

Several multinational corporations also said they would pull out of Russia in recent days. On Wednesday, Sony’s Playstation and Nintendo said they would cut ties.


“Sony Interactive Entertainment (SIE) joins the global community in calling for peace in Ukraine,” Sony said. “To support humanitarian aid, Sony Group Corporation announced a $2 million donation to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) and the international NGO, Save the Children, to support the victims of this tragedy.”


And a Nintendo spokesperson said it would suspend all products to Russia “for the foreseeable future” due to “considerable volatility surrounding the logistics of shipping and distributing physical goods.”


Before that, McDonald’s, Starbucks, Coca-Cola, and General Electric said they would pull out of Russia—at least temporarily—including shuttering brick-and-mortar locations.

 
  • Informative
Reactions: Jimmy J. Weems
"most" doesn't mean civilians weren't specifically targeted, like what happened in several operations in Iraq.
Open to being corrected, but leaving aside individual soldiers or smaller units that have gone feral, I have not heard of a US military operation in Iraq intentionally setting out to kill or harm civilians as an objective. Were they reckless to it? Absolutely, and that does not excuse them of being overly reckless because they did that knowing that it could kill people when it was avoidable (which in itself can sometimes constitute a war crime) but it is qualitively different that harming civilians as the objective of a military operation.

I.E. The difference between USAAF Bombing of Germany vs the RAF Bomber Command's. One legitimately did try to avoid civilians to the extent it was possible, the other targeted them specifically.
Or Ukranians not letting their men leave (over 18 ) so they can be conscripted and sent to die against Russia. That aside, I do agree with you, this war is terrible, and fuck everyone who helped it get started.
Forcing people to fight in a defensive war of national survival is different than forcing them into an aggressive war based on (multiple) false premises.

Edit: Tfw your a Russoboo
1646934666026.png
 
Last edited by a moderator:
We know the Russian are being forced to fly low because they're resorting to dumb bomb for whatever reason, but I have a feeling they will use smart bombs for key battles like the upcoming one in Kyiv
They are forced to fly low right into manpad territory cause of the weather, and in an attempt to increase accuracy. If vatniks had any PGMs, they wouldn't be flying low level daytime CAS missions with Su-34s dropping vintage iron bombs. Same thing with cruise missiles - they ran out of those on day 2 and are now resorting to tochka-u knockoffs that can't hit the broad side of a city. Meanwhile, ukies get fed both sat and AWACs data on all russian movements, so the only thing they need to do is point their Osas at the right direction and turn on the radar for as long as it takes to acquire a target.
 
Yesterday there was a lot of buzz about Russia confiscating/nationalizing property of western companies who chose to pull out of Russia, supposedly they are voting on this today:

I don't see any newspapers publishing this yet, but from one youtuber source, this was passed and Russia nationalized 180 leased passenger aircraft, currently in service in Russia + pass the law to nationalize/confiscate property of any foreign company that participate in sanctions.

The problem is that many Russian money is tied in foreign banks and accounts are frozen. I can see western investors eyeing those as a comp for courts.

The other problem is overall country stability toward business. Despite war and destruction, gas pipelines continue to operate and gas flows. This is an assurance to investors that business will not be affected by politics and investment is relatively safe.

Also, rutracker was unblocked in Russia which may signal that western IP will not be safe and violations will not be dealt with and prosecuted.


This will also have long lasting consequences for years to come since investment and disregard for private property. In terms of companies quitting their operations in Russia, that may not technically violate any contracts since companies are operating at will and can theoretically close any plant for any reason. Taking of private property is another ball of wax.
 
The US in the cold war was far more ruthless, their behaviour in Vietnam and South America was unarguably fucked up beyond belief.
Let us all not forget that part of the reason the U.S. is particularly sensitive to war crimes issues today is because of the master clusterf***k that was Vietnam? The U.S. army was a very different animal then, and there were massive reforms of the U.S. military after Vietnam ended.
 
Last edited:
WaPo: The online attention industry that helps Russian misinformation get traction

By Philip Bump
Today at 10:50 a.m. EST

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov made very clear on Thursday how much faith the world should put in his government’s claims.

Asked whether Russia was planning to attack other countries after Ukraine — a potent concern for nearby nations — Lavrov denied any such plans.

“We’re not planning to attack other countries,” Lavrov said through an interpreter, adding: “We did not attack Ukraine.” He went on to repeat the purported rationale for Russia’s invasion: that it was acting defensively against a predicted Ukrainian attack.

This defies both evidence and logic. In the days before its invasion, Russian-allied groups in eastern Ukraine contrived a series of purported reasons that served as a predicate for Russia declaring them independent — and then moving military forces into the regions. But, of course, the Russian military was already surrounding Ukraine with nearly 200,000 troops, stationing tanks and support vehicles at Ukraine’s northern, eastern and southern borders. It’s like a gang surrounding one guy on the street and then announcing they have no choice but to attack him because one of them heard he was thinking of throwing the first punch.

Russia obviously attacked Ukraine, launching a first strike two weeks ago that targeted many of the country’s largest cities. It has tanks and soldiers permeating a large portion of the country — an unusual situation for a country acting defensively. Lavrov’s claim can be dismissed out of hand.

Immediately after making that assertion, though, he made another one: There were Pentagon-funded labs in Ukraine that “could be used” to make biological weapons. The Russian Defense Ministry released a statement alleging that labs in the country were trying to create a weaponized virus to spread into Russia via birds and animals. But, of course, the evidence of this activity was spirited away by American actors.

This claim is actually quite old, stretching back in some form to the Cold War itself. In 2018, Russia claimed that the United States was operating biolabs to conduct weapons research in the region. In April 2020, the U.S. Embassy in Ukraine released a statement addressing similar rumors.

“The U.S. Department of Defense’s Biological Threat Reduction Program works with the Ukrainian Government to consolidate and secure pathogens and toxins of security concern in Ukrainian government facilities, while allowing for peaceful research and vaccine development,” the statement said. “We also work with our Ukrainian partners to ensure Ukraine can detect and report outbreaks caused by dangerous pathogens before they pose security or stability threats.”

The claim has already been addressed multiple times in recent weeks. What’s more, the idea that America would willfully release a viral pathogen at this moment without expecting blowback is, in the context of the coronavirus, particularly silly. And yet here is Lavrov, transitioning seamlessly from we didn’t invade Ukraine to the U.S. is probably helping to make biological weapons.

And here is a contingent of American voices, eager to gain attention and support online, siding with Russia’s position in the guise of offering run-of-the-mill skepticism.

On Wednesday night, Fox News’s Jennifer Griffin — who has gained attention in recent weeks for pushing back on network guests’ false claims — explained to host Sean Hannity the government’s explanation for the facilities. A clip of it was isolated by far-right media personality Jack Posobiec and shared with his audience. His complaint: Griffin was simply articulating the U.S. position uncritically.

An immediate question should have come to mind here: Where’s the proof to back up Russia’s claims? If you’re sitting here just asking questions, shouldn’t you ask some questions about the people making the contested assertions in the first place? Isn’t it generally the task of those making an assertion to prove it, instead of demanding that the United States prove a negative?

What’s happening is that these claims are landing in an information economy that in multiple ways works to Russia’s advantage. There’s the political right’s skepticism of President Biden and his team and its interest in seeing Biden politically weakened. (That includes long-standing antipathy to Victoria Nuland, a State Department official in both the Obama and Biden administrations.) There’s the trust-no-expert philosophy that helped power Donald Trump’s outsider presidential bid and that has worsened the country’s response to the coronavirus pandemic.

That overlaps with the do-your-own-research spirit enabled by the Internet, in which people credulously cherry-pick information that reinforces their preferred narrative, establishes their intellectual independence or both. At times, those narratives are explicit baseless claims like QAnon — but for every debunking there is a community ready to reinforce and echo a claim. This all intertwines with the creation of a viable economy for misinformation in the guise of outside skepticism: subscription newsletters and patronage tools powered by social media pitches.

There has truly never been a better or more lucrative time to be a guy “just asking questions.”

For some subset of the country, there’s another motivation: political clout. Again, Trump’s presidency was largely powered by people who were inherently (and often justifiably!) distrustful of government. Trump leveraged and amplified that to build a strong base of political support. Now there are elected officials, particularly on the right, who seek to tread the same path. If voters want elected officials who pretend that the Russian government’s claims are as valid as the claims of the government for which those officials work, so be it.

Again, an immediate response should come to mind: The U.S. government has been dishonest in the past! We should be skeptical of its claims! And that is certainly true. It is also true that the government engages in covert activity that it would not want to reveal. No question about it.

But what we’re talking about here is something different. We’re not talking about an independent probe of government activity that has raised questions about what is happening in labs in Ukraine. We’re talking about a decades-long assertion from the Russian government that should be treated with far more skepticism from the outset than should claims from our own government. Our government does at least have some accountability mechanisms in place, through elections, criminal law and media scrutiny. Sergei Lavrov will face no sanction from the Russian people for misleading them. Quite the opposite.

At another point in Lavrov’s comments Thursday, he tried to rationalize Russia’s attack on a hospital in the city of Mariupol.

“Our delegation presented the facts that this maternity ward had been captured by Azov battalion a long time ago and other radicals,” Lavrov claimed through an interpreter. “All mothers, all pregnant ladies were taken out of that building, and this was the base of the Azov radicals.”

What about photos you might have seen of a pregnant woman being carried away on a stretcher (as on the front page of The Washington Post) or of a dazed pregnant woman walking through the rubble? Well, the Russian Embassy in the United Kingdom has an answer for that: False flag! Crisis actor! Etc.

This, too, is why Russia’s ploy works so well in a subsection of the American information ecosystem. You can always inject doubt faster than reality can be affirmed. And that doubt is perfect fuel for those whose incomes, popularity and political strength are dependent on distancing themselves from officialdom or peacocking about their own savvy and ability to peer through the looking glass.

“Make your own conclusions about how the public opinion is being manipulated in the whole world,” Lavrov said Thursday.

As indeed we should.

NYT: Accusations fly over Russian disinformation about biological weapons.

Russia, China and the United States continue to trade accusations of spreading disinformation about the war in Ukraine. A series of statements the last three days over allegations of chemical weapon use has become particularly testy.

A day after the White House and State Department sharply criticized Russia and China for spreading “outright lies” about the United States secretly developing biological weapons in Ukraine, China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs on Thursday doubled down on the accusation.

The exchange of statements underscored the intensity of the information war underway among the world’s powers.

“Russia is inventing false pretexts in an attempt to justify its own horrific actions in Ukraine,” the State Department said in a statement, a stance that was reiterated in posts by the White House press secretary, Jen Psaki, on Twitter, calling the accusations “preposterous.’’

The exchange showed the extent to which China has joined Russia as a proxy in trying to blame the United States for the conflict, even as the government in Beijing has sought to distance itself diplomatically from the carnage unfolding on the ground.

The accusation first emerged on Sunday when a spokesman for Russia’s Defense Ministry, Maj. Gen. Igor Y. Konashenkov, claimed that Russian special operations forces had discovered documents detailing Pentagon-funded “secret biological experiments” at laboratories in two Ukrainian cities, Kharkiv and Poltava.

The ministry provided copies of documents, in Ukrainian, but their veracity could not be determined.

On Tuesday, a spokesman for China’s Foreign Ministry, Zhao Lijian, used a question about the Russian accusations to accuse the United States of obfuscating about its work with biological and chemical weapons. Mr. Zhao has previously circulated conspiracy theories to deflect attention from China’s own policies, including one that linked the coronavirus pandemic not to Wuhan, where it began, but to research by the United States military at Fort Detrick, Md.

“Russia has a track record of accusing the West of the very crimes that Russia itself is perpetrating,” the State Department statement said, suggesting it could be laying the groundwork for its own attacks using prohibited weapons. “These tactics are an obvious ploy by Russia to try to justify further premeditated, unprovoked and unjustified attacks on Ukraine.”

The Institute for the Study of War, a Washington think tank that tracks the conflict, issued its own warning on Wednesday that the Russian statements could be part of an effort to lay the groundwork for its own chemical or biological attack. “Russia may conduct or fabricate such an attack and blame Ukraine and NATO to justify additional aggression against Ukraine,” it said.

Asked on Wednesday about the American statements, Mr. Zhao did not address them. Instead, he again cited Fort Detrick and insinuated that the United States was hiding secret work with biological weapons. The day before, he called the spread of disinformation “despicable and malicious.”

On Thursday, Global Times, the Communist Party newspaper, picked up another statement from General Konashenkov, this time saying, without evidence, that the American-funded labs in Ukraine were conducting experiments with coronaviruses in bats, the presumed source of the Covid-19 pandemic.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back