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
 
It's sorta understandable because while they can't bring in an army to take over anything, they have nukes. So it's always been this odd back and forth where we keep seeing how pathetic the Russian army is, but then there's always that thought of if everything goes to hell for Russia they could bring out nukes.

Problem is at this point people should be wondering if those nukes would end up just exploding in their silos if they tried using them given the state of disrepair everything Russian apparently is.
Honselty at this point. I almost wonder how stable their nukes are. With how things are going for them. I wouldn't be shocked if Putin trieds to lunch a nuke and ends up taking out some of Russia by mere accident.
 
Nope but how long did it take for Russians to pull out of Afganistan ? Russians cant keep going indefinetly but they can keep going until they run out of weapons, and thats assuming they arent able to bypass critical components sanctions to atleast small level. It can go on for long time.
Not sure how long, Russia's economy was already in a pretty bad shape before this. It's easy to justify hard times when you're fighting a defensive war, but that's not the case for Russia this time around.
Vatniks are convinced that it's not going to affect them, once they find out that the contrary is true, their mood will change. It's guaranteed as sanctions won't be lifted anytime soon.
 
Whatever Russia tries. They are corrupt as fuck and you have to take that into account.

Nordstream 1, completed in 2010, had the following costs:
2,1 Million Euro per km on the German side
5,8 Million Euro per km on the Russian side

And it appears the corruption went to all layers, even the important once like the military.
 
There's no start with Putin as president with a new flag or without. Bolotnaya was a good wake up call, however.
Yes, at minimum altho Putin could well try blame shaman Shoigu for the war. Navalny might be bit A & N towards Jews and minorities (even his undeniable words disparage Tatar bosses, for example, as uniquely corrupt) but a lawyer might be better than some siloviki like Putin, even if Navalny or whoever might be a sort of puppet. A puppet might be better than someone able to command security elements, like Putin was.
 
Russians on social media claiming they were targeting Ukrainian armed forces at the train station just as it was hit with the missile, resulting in dozens of civilian deaths and many more wounded. Apparently, it was promptly deleted. Russofags claim that only Ukraine has these Tochka-U rockets, and it's patently false - Russia has them and uses them.

IMG_20220408_172340_467.jpg

Yes, at minimum altho Putin could well try blame shaman Shoigu for the war. Navalny might be bit A & N towards Jews and minorities (even his undeniable words disparage Tatar bosses, for example, as uniquely corrupt) but a lawyer might be better than some siloviki like Putin, even if Navalny or whoever might be a sort of puppet. A puppet might be better than someone able to command security elements, like Putin was.
I'm not sure where people got that idea regarding Navalny, his position toward immigrants is sensible, and I never heard him single out Jews for any reason whatsoever.
 
Nope but how long did it take for Russians to pull out of Afganistan ? Russians cant keep going indefinetly but they can keep going until they run out of weapons, and thats assuming they arent able to bypass critical components sanctions to atleast small level. It can go on for long time.
Russia is a lot more dependent on other nations than it used to be and the methods for shutting them down are a lot simpler now. Before the war how many thought about whether Russia could get seeds of all fucking things.

Russia can probably continue throwing bodies into the conflict, but without supplies how threatening can they be?

Russia is also against a country where the world’s economic might is working to supply them with the fanciest toys possible to ensure they push back Russia and don’t cause yet another refugee crisis. It’s not a stellar situation for Russia.

The most we can reasonably expect of Russia is they can setup artillery for a while to hold onto Crimea and whatever until the west gets annoyed and decides to find Ukraine do it can get even more and better weapons.
 
Based. Still don't get why the West isn't pushing more for this. Getting the Ukrainians more soviet era mid-long range SAMs they can use would be the most effective weapon option at this point, given the Air Force is the last slim hope the Russians have.

The worst part is it's an easy fucking solution to pull off as well. A bunch of the countries that have spare Soviet systems are in NATO which means we could easily offer to station US/British systems as a temporary cover, with a promise of a sweet deal on buying a Western alternative to replace them in the long term.
 
Nope but how long did it take for Russians to pull out of Afganistan ? Russians cant keep going indefinetly but they can keep going until they run out of weapons, and thats assuming they arent able to bypass critical components sanctions to atleast small level. It can go on for long time.
Afghanistan was lower intensity and the Russians then were wielding the might of the Soviet Union at its peak (and it's arguable that Afghanistan was one of the last straws to the Soviet collapse). The Z-machine nowadays is running on the fumes of the Soviets.
 
Yeah, I've noticed. Would be interesting to hear their thoughts after the recent developments.
At the very least that video is useful for its analysis, predictions always have a chance of missing the mark.

Checked his twitter and he does seem less confident in the military discipline of Russia, he mentions that column that was attacked the other day by Ukraine and how the Russians behaved almost identically to the way they did during the First Chechen War whenever they got ambushed which is not a good thing for Russia.

He suggests that supply wise the West needs to start supplying Ukraine more so as a regular military force instead of an insurgency, as many in the West had predicted that at this point Ukrainians would be forced to do insurgent operations against the Russians in a similar fashion to the Chechens or the Mujahideen before that.

He seems to see that Finland will join NATO but only if Sweden can also be convinced to join which is to be expected as they're both neutral but both governments have been appalled by how the Russians have behaved in Ukraine and both governments were spurred on further by the news of the Bucha massacre. And according to recent polling in both countries the citizens are looking much more favorably to joining NATO than they have in decades.

This video was posted on March 25, a full two weeks ago, exact, from today. A lot has changed since this vid was posted, and, to be fair, most people were predicting the exact same results when all this started. I don't think anyone predicted that the Russians would perform this poorly.

Very much so, even I admit that when this kicked off I was certain that at most Ukraine could resist maybe 2-3 weeks and that was peak optimism on my part.
 
This video raises a very good point that I haven't seen mentioned yet:

If Kiev was indeed a "feint" by Russia then it might actually be one of the worst feints in military history

Ignoring all the international prestige they lose from giving up ground, the vast majority of the Ukrainian armed forces are still operational and are gearing up for a titanic confrontation in the east, so clearly their plan of "wiping out enemy forces near Kiev" was a failure.

Whatever angle you look at this from, Russia failed

For real, if you still believe Russia wasn't banking on blitzing the capital you're either autistic, gullible, or (more likely) a mix of both
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back