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
 
Russia uses barely trained conscripts. It's far cheaper and simpler to replace them.

Russia's entire theory of war for over a century is throwing huge amounts of peasants at the enemy.
but they don't have that anymore. the massive peasant underclass where the average age was 25 and population growth was steady, it's simply not there anymore. today instead the masses have an average age of like 50, and instead of growth they have population shrinkage.
 
but they don't have that anymore. the massive peasant underclass where the average age was 25 and population growth was steady, it's simply not there anymore. today instead the masses have an average age of like 50, and instead of growth they have population shrinkage.
You can speculate all you want about what you think Russia should do, but that's not the reality of what they are doing, which is sending a ton of non-ethnic Russian peasants to fight, people Putin needs to control, even moreso because he's shown how incompetent his army has become.

It's not just his barely tamed chechen lunatics there.
 
but they don't have that anymore. the massive peasant underclass where the average age was 25 and population growth was steady, it's simply not there anymore. today instead the masses have an average age of like 50, and instead of growth they have population shrinkage.
They either don't know or don't care. It seems that the boomer class of Russia is willing to have the country die with them.
 
but they don't have that anymore. the massive peasant underclass where the average age was 25 and population growth was steady, it's simply not there anymore. today instead the masses have an average age of like 50, and instead of growth they have population shrinkage.
I suppose they could call up unemployed and underemployed or not in reserved occupations between 16 and 60, prisoners maybe too, but they probably won't. It is not clear they could even equip them anyhow. I suppose Tsar Monke might stamp his foot and demand his victim and allies not fight back so hard else he'd use nukes, but I don't see that germaphobe and one time nervous civil servant doing that. Who knows though?

You can speculate all you want about what you think Russia should do, but that's not the reality of what they are doing, which is sending a ton of non-ethnic Russian peasants to fight, people Putin needs to control, even moreso because he's shown how incompetent his army has become.

It's not just his barely tamed chechen lunatics there.
The Chechens or Kadyrovski barely seem to fight. They seem more like a sort of Cheka with nice clean larper gear. A big portion seem to be bewildered Central Asians with dodgy papers doing it for citizenship or just fooled into it, like not a few of the Russians. It seems such a pile of shit. The Western Putinists (very few barring some old American tankie actually volunteered to fight 'globohomo' and the 'Illuminati') must be high for the patriotism of the stupid and boomers can be understood.
 
Last edited:
RF buses and subways starting to sport ads with "short-term" military contracts, so any vatnik can get their murder-boner on

View attachment 3178277

Meanwhile a lot of equipment is coming out of long term storage to equip new ranks is in bad shape, cloth of the plate carriers is totally rotted out (most likely cotton based), plates are badly rusted which indicates excessive moisture during storage.

Train shipping manifest indicates items pulled out of storage and being shipped. On paper, the items are spelled out and counted, but item condition is not noted, simply that they are present. Some plate carriers have been crudely patched with needle and thread (most likely when taken into storage)

View attachment 3178283View attachment 3178285
View attachment 3178290View attachment 3178291View attachment 3178292
a rusty iron plate will still stop a lot more bullets than no plate
honestly i doubt a bit of rust makes armor plating significantly worse in practice. i think that the bigger damage will be on the soldiers morale, because walking around in half rotten gear with rust everywhere doesn't exactly inspire trust in your armys leadership and organisation quality.
Imagine going to the front lines and dying because you didn't get a tetanus shot.
 
Last edited:
I'm not sure how ocean currents works but if the ship did blow up into fragments like the HMS Hood, I hope we see fragments of the beast wash up in Odessa and other Ukrainian controlled areas.

Ammo explosion is definitely going to severely damaged the ship.

As far as I can tell there's no ammo on the ship that could catastrophically damage the superstructure, just a bow gun.

Rocket fuel from the cruise missiles are the most likely candidate for a severe fire and very likely to be damaged by a hit. The Russians are saying the missiles are intact apparently but knows if well see evidence in a timely manner.

Either way if the fire was intense enough to require evacuation and towing its fucked for the foreseeable future if not permanently.
 
Probably not much in terms of AA, although the new gap in their sensor coverage doesn't help; but it's not like an equivalent to Aegis. The thing was designed to launch cruise missiles, not so much for networked air/sea defense & cover. But if their systems & escorts couldn't handle even a fairly simple diversion & attack, well...
Moskva is or was the principle AA resource for the Black Sea fleet. Her purpose is AA anti Missile and Anti Ship/Anti Carrier. She wasn't a land attack ship. She was the Soviet counterpart to the US Aegis Cruisers.

 
As far as I can tell there's no ammo on the ship that could catastrophically damage the superstructure, just a bow gun.

Rocket fuel from the cruise missiles are the most likely candidate for a severe fire and very likely to be damaged by a hit. The Russians are saying the missiles are intact apparently but knows if well see evidence in a timely manner.

Either way if the fire was intense enough to require evacuation and towing its fucked for the foreseeable future if not permanently.

Bow gun, SAN-6 Nato Desgination "Grumble" Surface to air and Bazalt/Vulkan missiles all could fuck up the superstructure if hit, or if just bad storage and behaviour.

For some context on the Slava Class it was repeatedly delayed and outdated before even the first hull was laid down. With its design ethic being mostly created in the late 1960s when big and silly ships like this were still somewhat the norm (but also being phased out by the western navies such as the Royal Navy who cancelled a bunch of planned large vessels in the late 60s). The first hulls wouldn't be laid down until the late 70s and by the time the first ship rolled into the ocean she was outdated. Despite seeing this and keeping one on as a curiosity the Russians planned ten of them, laying one down when the first Arleigh Burke was being built.

The Arleigh Burke in comparison had a fairly lightning development and production cycle, starting in 1980, final designs nailed by 85 and first hulls laid down in 88. Its remained a solid core fleet ship ever since and makes an excellent all rounder.
 
As far as I can tell there's no ammo on the ship that could catastrophically damage the superstructure, just a bow gun.

Rocket fuel from the cruise missiles are the most likely candidate for a severe fire and very likely to be damaged by a hit. The Russians are saying the missiles are intact apparently but knows if well see evidence in a timely manner.

Either way if the fire was intense enough to require evacuation and towing its fucked for the foreseeable future if not permanent

As far as I can tell there's no ammo on the ship that could catastrophically damage the superstructure, just a bow gun.

Rocket fuel from the cruise missiles are the most likely candidate for a severe fire and very likely to be damaged by a hit. The Russians are saying the missiles are intact apparently but knows if well see evidence in a timely manner.

Either way if the fire was intense enough to require evacuation and towing its fucked for the foreseeable future if not permanently.
Appologies for double post. My phone wont let me merge these today.

Moskva also has torpedo's behind hatches along the aft freeboard. Which are legendary for their ability to explode on their own ship. There's a reason why most navies stopped putting them on anything larger than a destroyer.

The torpedos would also be near the supply of Aviation Fuel for the helicopters. Which is unquestionably the most dangerous fire risk on any ship.

The big missile tubes along the side are huge Anti Ship Cruise Missiles. Intended to be fired at Carriers. They would use a potent mix of aviation fuel, as they are air breathing jets, plus a huge single target warhead intended to maul a carrier. Any of those cooking off would be bad.

The area right behind the smoke stacks is 2 magazines of SAM's.

Of course this being the Russian Navy it's likely they didn't even bother to put up no smoking signs in token service to fire prevention
 
There’s no way there aren’t any. Plus this was the Black Fleet Flagship. It flew the Admiral’s flag. So the Uke’s might have added one or two Admiral’s to their score card. Alongside the 7 Generals. If nothing else this war seems a remarkably efficient way of clearing out the upper tiers of the Russian Military. Leaving room at the top for fresh blood. (Do please try not to slip on all the flesh blood splattered about)

over 50% of AA for the entire fleet. A whole lot of senior captains on staff for planning, many could have command of their own ships. There was a RF Navy plane coming from Moscow to Crimea earlier today. I'd expect they will need people to take over a lot of command and planning.

That cruiser was bragged to be able to sink entire Turkish navy without leaving the port of Sevastopol, with some missiles claim to have range up to 1000mi. Ironically Turkish ship picks up 54 of its sailors.

Current scorecard:

1649958247390.png



In terms of human resources, Russians tsars and then bolshevicks always, historically, relied on "absorbed" nations to compliment their armies, much like Germans in WWII formed foreign troops. You can see that during Crimean war in the 19th century, wast majority of troops were Ukrainian just looking at surnames.

When bolshevicks took over Russia, adding Ukraine under its control was not only adding land, but available conscripts and that extended to other lands. Russia has plenty of lands, but it needs more people for the armies. It already did the same with both Crimea and Donbas where they mercilessly grab as many warm bodies as they can. They also do use Abkhasian/South Osetia troops, Chechens and Armenians. It looks like Kazakhstan took a big pass on helping, but otherwise it would be a huge resource in manpower.

Soviet Union produced something like 22'000 of tanks and I bet on paper they are all GTG, just in long term storage. AKs ... Soviet Union planned for multiples of entire army needs since they felt, like in WWII, a lot of storage facilities will be destroyed, so ample backups were made.

I bet that original plan was to subjugate entire Ukraine, with it as a puppet state, RF would have pretty damn huge horde of an army that can pave highways with bodies into Europe or at least former com-block territories. Would NATO use nukes if Russia didn't while invading Estonia? Could they stomach 100k, 200k dead before they are willing to let Russia occupy Baltics again? I'm not so sure that NATO could survive that test of resolve from their response and pussyfooting around Putin, trying to not provoke the monke tsar.
 
I've seen some telegram accounts claim that supposedly russia has started running false flag terrorist attacks on cities/villages/checkpoints inside it's borders blaming the Ukrainian forces for them.

If true I have no idea how it works with "According to Plan"/"We're winning" narrative when you start saying the enemy is now committing strikes in your territory, are you winning or is the enemy running a successful counter offensive over thousands of soldiers you have on the front fucking line?

Also I remember reading that putin said russia would strike Kiev command centers if Ukraine doesn't stop attacking targets within ru borders, gotta love how it works over there, excuses for going forward with your threats always just materialize as needed.
 
Apparently the Ukrainian used a Bayraktar to distract the air defense while the Neptunes are being launched, or the Neptunes escaped the Russians' notice by flying very close to the sea. I don't know which one is true

What is certain, however, is that Russia is so incompetent they lost the flagship of a fleet to a state that currently lacks a naval force. This is just so embarrassing, especially to a Nuclear Power. The notion that Russia could win this war have been severely reduced since that ship must have been very important for their sea-based bombardment and artilleries. And if Kyiv can destroy the Russian ship out on the sea, they definitely can destroy the buildup forces for the next Russian Eastern Advances. Just think about that

I really want to know how the Vatniks and the Russiaboos are going to spin this. The mental gymnastics must be so hard to do, especially since the news of the attack was also confirmed by the Russian propaganda arm. The funny thing is, by omitting that this was a Ukrainian attack, they're saying their forces is very incompetent they could lose a ship due to an accident

As late as two months ago people unironically thought NATO and the US in particular would get rolled over by Russia in a 'real war' (maybe the most terminal kopeidil addicts still do). I honestly thought the Russian Navy might come out of this looking the best of the Russian military simply because they had little to actually do and thus the least chances to embarrass themselves but this is just humiliating. The fact that it's the fucking Snake Island ship manages to add even more insult to injury.
As much as we attribute the crippling of a flagship of the Black Sea fleet to incompetence mocking the "dumb" Russians without introspection is dubious.

When one examines the Falklands War, the British could have been pushed back if the Argentinians had some better fuses for their bombs or have just two Exocet Anti-ship missiles that functioned properly.

I am not saying the Russians are competent but I just remember that dumb luck or a few dollars extra could be have been the turning point in many conflicts.
 
Moskva is or was the principle AA resource for the Black Sea fleet. Her purpose is AA anti Missile and Anti Ship/Anti Carrier. She wasn't a land attack ship. She was the Soviet counterpart to the US Aegis Cruisers.

If anyone wants a good explanation of what happen my good buddy Jive Turkey, who is a 20 year vet of the US nuke boats does a great breakdown of both the ship and the missiles and why how this AA ship got hit by a 30 year old missile.

Give it a watch if your interested!

 

Biden says he IS ready to go to Ukraine: President hints White House is planning a high-level trip after previously telling troops he wasn't allowed to cross the border from Poland​

  • President Biden said he would like to visit Ukraine
  • He confirmed a report his administration was looking at sending a senior official to visit war-torn Kyiv
  • 'We're making that decision now,' Biden said
  • Politico reported Secretary of State Anthony Blinken or Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin are likely to go to match visits made to Ukraine by European leaders
  • Biden has said before he'd like to visit Ukraine - he was last there in 2017
  • While in Poland last month, Biden said he wanted to cross the border into Ukraine but 'they' wouldn't let me

President Joe Biden said on Thursday he would like to visit the Ukraine and confirmed a report his administration is having conversations about sending a senior official to war-torn Kyiv.
'We're making that decision now,' Biden said when asked if a top member of his administration would make the trip.
But when asked if he'd like to go, the president said: 'Yeah.'

It's not the first time Biden has expressed his interest in making such a trip.
While visiting U.S. troops in Poland last month, Biden lamanted he couldn't cross the border into the Ukraine, saying 'they' wouldn't let him.
'They will not let me, understandably, I guess, cross the border and take a look at what’s going on in Ukraine,' he said.
White House officials have pointed to the incredible security precedures that would need to be put into place for Biden to visit to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.
Before Biden went to Poland, White House press secretary Jen Psaki ruled out a presidential visit to Ukraine.
The latest round of questions came after Politico reported on Wednesday that the White House was considering a high-level trip to the Ukraine match those by European leaders.
A visit by Biden or Vice President Kamala Harris was ruled out with sources telling the news outlet that Secretary of State Anthony Blinken or Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin was more likely to be tapped to go.
European leaders such as British Prime Minister Boris Johnson, Austrian Chancellor Karl Nehammer, and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen have all visited Zelensky in the past week.
The White House is looking to match such a trip as a show of support for Ukraine.
Biden last visited Kyiv as vice president, in January 2017 - three days before leaving office.
It was his sixth official visit to Ukraine, where he was hoping to prevent Russia from consuming more of the country after its annexation of Crimea in 2014.
President Bill Clinton visited Kyiv three times. George W. Bush became the first U.S. president to visit, in March 2008.
Meanwhile, Biden spoke with Zelensky for nearly an hour on Wednesday to tell him the United States was sending another $800 million in weapons to help him fight off Vladimir Putin's forces.
'I just spoke with President Zelenskyy and shared with him that my Administration is authorizing an additional $800 million in weapons, ammunition, and other security assistance to Ukraine,' Biden said in a statement on the call.
The new round of assistance comes as Russia is beefing up forces for a new assault on Ukraine's eastern Donbas region as it focuses its military might on that area of the country after failing to capture Kyiv.
The new package of defensive measures includes 'highly effective weapons systems' that are 'tailored to the wider assault we expect Russia to launch in eastern Ukraine,' Biden said.
It will include artillery systems, artillery rounds, armored personnel carriers, and additional helicopters.
'The steady supply of weapons the United States and its Allies and partners have provided to Ukraine has been critical in sustaining its fight against the Russian invasion. It has helped ensure that Putin failed in his initial war aims to conquer and control Ukraine. We cannot rest now. As I assured President Zelenskyy, the American people will continue to stand with the brave Ukrainian people in their fight for freedom,' Biden said.
Zelensky said the two men also talked about Russian war crimes in the Ukraine and enhanced financial sanctions on Russia in addition to the additional defensive aid.

'Continued constant dialogue with @POTUS. Assessed Russian war crimes. Discussed additional package of defensive and possible macro-financial aid. Agreed to enhance sanctions,' he tweeted.
Biden on Wednesday formally extended U.S. economic sanctions on Russia for another year but no new ones have yet been announced.
National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan told the Economic Club of Washington there are more sanctions coming next week but did not offer any details.
The U.S. transfer of equipment to Ukraine will include Mi-17 helicopters, howitzer cannons, coastal defense drones and protective suits to safeguard personnel in the event of a chemical, biological or nuclear attack.
But it won't include any U.S. boots on the ground, the administration reiterated.
'There will be no U.S. pilots flying the helicopters into Ukraine,' said Pentagon spokesman John Kirby on Wednesday.
He said the helicopters will likely be shipped to the region and trucked in.
The United States has provided more than $2.4 billion in security assistance to Ukraine since President Biden took office last year, including $1.7 billion since Russia launched its invasion Feb. 24.
Zelensky has pleaded for more sophisticated weapons to counter Putin's forces.
Ukrainian defense minister Oleksii Reznikov, who spoke with Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin on Tuesday, said his country is seeking additional unmanned aircraft, air-defense systems, artillery, armored vehicles, combat aircraft and anti-ship missiles.
As of Tuesday, the Pentagon was close to finishing its delivery of the last items in an $800 million security assistance package approved by Biden in March.
Those items include Switchblade drones that can be armed with explosives and flown into targets, Stinger antiaircraft missiles, and anti-armor weapons including Javelin missiles.
'These items are not sitting around very long,' a senior defense official said in a briefing with reporters. 'Once they get into the transshipment sites, they are palletized and put on trucks, those trucks are picked up by Ukrainian armed forces and taken into Ukraine.'
 
The United States has provided more than $2.4 billion in security assistance to Ukraine since President Biden took office last year, including $1.7 billion since Russia launched its invasion Feb. 24.
Increasing our debt by the billions for shitslav wars. It's Bush all over again.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Creep3r
Appologies for double post. My phone wont let me merge these today.

Moskva also has torpedo's behind hatches along the aft freeboard. Which are legendary for their ability to explode on their own ship. There's a reason why most navies stopped putting them on anything larger than a destroyer.

The torpedos would also be near the supply of Aviation Fuel for the helicopters. Which is unquestionably the most dangerous fire risk on any ship.

The big missile tubes along the side are huge Anti Ship Cruise Missiles. Intended to be fired at Carriers. They would use a potent mix of aviation fuel, as they are air breathing jets, plus a huge single target warhead intended to maul a carrier. Any of those cooking off would be bad.

The area right behind the smoke stacks is 2 magazines of SAM's.

Of course this being the Russian Navy it's likely they didn't even bother to put up no smoking signs in token service to fire prevention

The electronically detonated warheads on any semi-modern torpedo or missile aren't going to go off because of damage, not even the Russians would be that technically incompetent. And like I said its doubtful any amount of aviation or rocket fuel would damage a ship to the point of a total loss, same with torpedo propellant.

The Ukrainians hitting the ship seems a given since they were saying it before the Russians were admitting to a problem. I'm waiting to hopefully see pictures of the ship because the Russians claim of the ammo cooking off but the cruise missiles being intact doesn't make any sense. Those missiles going off and engulfing the ship in rocket fuel is the only scenario I can see where deck mounted munition and gun magazines going off, most of it is forward mounted and the flight deck is at the very rear. More to the point I don't see how any of those were cooking off to the point of forcing an evacuation and not at least damaging those tubes.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back