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

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

 

[No. 7 cat]

Source is somewhere on Telegram, but the original source is clear enough. The troop figure cannot be verified, but is likelier than the c. 1300 that delusionally Lavrov claimed, and the other figures, like that for vehicles are of a magnitude noted on sites like the Oryx blog.

fairly self explanatory

source

By the bye, it is a somewhat strange thing that Russia's richest man Vladimir Potanin has apparently not being sanctioned (RT article below claiming some western companies are looking at asset swaps to avoid write-downs on exiting Russia). Getting that level of wealth probably doesn't involve not getting with Putin.

Western banks eyeing asset swaps to exit Russia – media​

UniCredit and Citigroup are reportedly trying to avoid bulky write-downs related to quitting Russia over Ukraine

© Getty Images / Maxim Blinov © Sputnik
In an attempt to escape hefty write-downs on operations in Russia due to their exit from the sanction-hit country, UniCredit and Citigroup are exploring the possibility of swapping assets with Russian banks, FT reports, citing people with knowledge of the matter.
The plan comes amid a mass exodus of foreign lenders from Russia due to Western sanctions imposed on the nation over its military operation in Ukraine. According to estimates revealed last week, European banks took a hit of nearly $10 billion writing down assets and setting aside cash to protect themselves against the expected economic ramifications of anti-Russia sanctions.
UniCredit is discussing the sale of its Russian business to several financial institutions that haven’t been sanctioned by the West, people briefed on the talks told the media.

The Italian lender, which could lose €5.3 billion ($5.5 billion) due to its exit, reportedly rejected the offer by Interros group, the investment business owned by Vladimir Potanin, one of Russia’s richest men who has not been included on the sanctions list.
Interros has already acquired several businesses, including Rosbank, a subsidiary of French Societe Generale, as well as a 35% stake in highly rated fintech firm TCS from Russian businessman Oleg Tinkov.
Meanwhile, Citigroup is holding “multiple conversations” with medium-sized Russian banks to sell its consumer operations and part of its commercial undertakings in the country, a person familiar with the matter said. A sale to a non-sanctioned entity, rather than an asset swap, is reportedly preferable for American multinational banking groups.

Dr Mark Felton on a Feb Russian cruise missile attack on a Ukrainian Mig-29 'Fulcrum' repair facility in Lvov which resulted in the destruction of three Azerbaijani Mig-29s. He points out that this country had only a few MIG-21s, but brought 14 from Ukraine in 2005, and countries like Sudan, Kazakhstan (for MIG-27s) and Bangladesh have availed of this facility.

 

[MG-34]

View attachment 3286163

Source is somewhere on Telegram, but the original source is clear enough. The troop figure cannot be verified, but is likelier than the c. 1300 that delusionally Lavrov claimed, and the other figures, like that for vehicles are of a magnitude noted on sites like the Oryx blog.


View attachment 3286237

fairly self explanatory

View attachment 3286250

source

By the bye, it is a somewhat strange thing that Russia's richest man Vladimir Potanin has apparently not being sanctioned (RT article below claiming some western companies are looking at asset swaps to avoid write-downs on exiting Russia). Getting that level of wealth probably doesn't involve not getting with Putin.

Dr Mark Felton on a Feb Russian cruise missile attack on a Ukrainian Mig-29 'Fulcrum' repair facility in Lvov which resulted in the destruction of three Azerbaijani Mig-29s. He points out that this country had only a few MIG-21s, but brought 14 from Ukraine in 2005, and countries like Sudan, Kazakhstan (for MIG-27s) and Bangladesh have availed of this facility.

That Felton video (strange seeing him cover something besides WW2 stuff) raises an interesting point. Since the Russians haven't formally declared war does that mean they are financially responsible for non Ukraine property they are destroying? I know the US wrote cheques for breaking 3rd party shit in Iraq, but I'm sure the Russians will try to weasel out from their chimpery.

 

[Snekposter]

That Felton video (strange seeing him cover something besides WW2 stuff) raises an interesting point. Since the Russians haven't formally declared war does that mean they are financially responsible for non Ukraine property they are destroying? I know the US wrote cheques for breaking 3rd party shit in Iraq, but I'm sure the Russians will try to weasel out from their chimpery.

I doubt they'll be able to. Weaseling your way out of things requires some sort of leverage, either diplomatic and economic soft power or military hard power. Russia will have neither hard nor soft power after this. The Ukrainians are finishing the job of wrecking their military their own corruption started, and their economy is getting slowly but steadily hammered by the sanctions. Near as I can tell the only part of the Russian export sector that's functioning in the slightest in Gazprom (for obvious reasons), but that by itself won't be able to do jack to support Russia, especially as people start finding alternatives given Putin's heavy-handed exploitation of it for his political aims. "The spice oil must flow" is the number one unwritten rule of the modern world, and Putin fucking with its flow has pissed people off. Short-term they'll suck it up, but long-term? They'll find other sources and alternatives best they can to prevent a similar occurrence in the future. The burned hand teaches best, as the saying goes. And there's a lot of burned hands.

And now that the seriousness is out of the way, a shitpost:

 

[Unarmed Gunman]

it is a somewhat strange thing that Russia's richest man Vladimir Potanin has apparently not being sanctioned

What better way to sow dissent if you're the US, then to not sanction Putin's richest, most trusted ally. Easy way to make Putin suspicious and not know who to trust.

 

[Pocket Dragoon]

Last month I heard something about the UK sending Brimstones to Ukraine, and I initially thought they'd be limited to use with fixed or rotary-wing platforms (i.e. drones & helos) and naval assets; given that the missile is fairly large, being essentially an upgraded Hellfire.

Turns out that's not the case, and the Ukrainians have developed at least one way of using them on the ground, the first of which is a tracked, armored launcher.

Edit: I just saw more footage of Ukraine range-testing them in pairs, from an RWS turret, twin-arm launcher; similar to those seen on warships.... but now it seems to have disappeared.
Edit2: It was a clip roughly 10 seconds long in a compilation video of various Brimstone launches from a year ago. But they may have been Hellfires, as they look so similar.

From armyrecognition.com:

"According to a video published to the Russian social network "VK" on May 12, 2022, Ukrainian armed forces have developed a mobile container launcher station mounted on a truck 4x4 chassis able to fire the surface-to-surface version of the MBDA Brimstone missile that will be capable to destroy Russian tanks and armored vehicles."

 

[Mr E. Grifter]

View attachment 3286163

Source is somewhere on Telegram, but the original source is clear enough. The troop figure cannot be verified, but is likelier than the c. 1300 that delusionally Lavrov claimed, and the other figures, like that for vehicles are of a magnitude noted on sites like the Oryx blog.


View attachment 3286237

fairly self explanatory

View attachment 3286250

source

By the bye, it is a somewhat strange thing that Russia's richest man Vladimir Potanin has apparently not being sanctioned (RT article below claiming some western companies are looking at asset swaps to avoid write-downs on exiting Russia). Getting that level of wealth probably doesn't involve not getting with Putin.

Dr Mark Felton on a Feb Russian cruise missile attack on a Ukrainian Mig-29 'Fulcrum' repair facility in Lvov which resulted in the destruction of three Azerbaijani Mig-29s. He points out that this country had only a few MIG-21s, but brought 14 from Ukraine in 2005, and countries like Sudan, Kazakhstan (for MIG-27s) and Bangladesh have availed of this facility.

On Russian losses, I generally believe Ukrainian figures except when it comes to Helicopters and Aircraft losses.

Reason being twofold, first as noted, Oryx has followed the losses and those he has counted account for about 2/3rds of the Russian losses noted by the Ukrainians. The Oryx number is a bottom limit to losses, but there is every reason to believe there are more undocumented losses out there. The only exception to this is aircraft losses, we have not seen anywhere near the losses that are claimed by the Ukrainians. Even taking into account the shelling of the airfield - indeed NATO intelligence seems to highlight that Russia does not operate freely in areas with Ukrainian air defences. Which makes me question what opportunities they have to shoot down all these aircraft?

I saw a clever person compare the claimed Russian losses, and included in those numbers the losses from the recent failed bridging operations that the Ukrainians had thwarted and caused catastrophic losses for the Russians. There was, around the exact time of the failed crossing, a substantial spike in claimed Russian forces.

So while unverified and not totally accurate, I think the Ukrainian figures are good enough to give a ballpark figure for Russia losses on the ground.

Last month I heard something about the UK sending Brimstones to Ukraine, and I initially thought they'd be limited to use with fixed or rotary-wing platforms (i.e. drones & helos) and naval assets; given that the missile is fairly large, being essentially an upgraded Hellfire.

Turns out that's not the case, and the Ukrainians have developed at least one way of using them on the ground, the first of which is a tracked, armored launcher.

Edit: I just saw more footage of Ukraine range-testing them in pairs, from an RWS turret, twin-arm launcher; similar to those seen on warships.... but now it seems to have disappeared.
Edit2: It was a clip roughly 10 seconds long in a compilation video of various Brimstone launches from a year ago. But they may have been Hellfires, as they look so similar.

From armyrecognition.com:

I believe the UK developed the launcher, speculation online is that it is based off of an old testbed for the Brimstone. Fairly impressed to throw something like that together in such a short amount of time.

IIRC, Brimstone were developed from Hellfire, but the extensive upgrades mean while they share a similar look they are in effect very different weapons. Brimstone is fire and forget, and is much more accurate in targeting. Given the fact they will be used from these trailers, and thus launched from the ground, their low altitude combined with the poor performance of Russia mobile air defense systems seen so far in the conflict means I would expect these things to fuck up Russian armour,... not that the Ukrainians need that much help with that these days.

 

[Pocket Dragoon]

I believe the UK developed the launcher, speculation online is that it is based off of an old testbed for the Brimstone. Fairly impressed to throw something like that together in such a short amount of time.

It definitely illustrates the enhanced development opportunities that Ukraine is providing arms manufacturers, which pairs well with innate Ukrainian nigger-rigging skills.

And it looks like they've already been used against the Russians, who've also recovered identifiable missile fragments.

Spoiler: Yet can't figure out how to wear boots

 

[The Demon Pimp of Razgriz]

There are a lot of corpses but the only stink I've seen being raised and breaking through the censorship was over the warship moskva sailors and as I said it's probably only because their parents were a little higher on social ladder, even then there wasn't that much resistance and the government felt confident enough to basically tell them to go fuck themselves and forget compensation as their son went AWOL.

They have enough to throw into Ukraine..... the days they could have done the same to all of Western Europe? Again and again until they hit the Rhine? or the Pyrenees? Yes, I agree that's over. But they still have more than enough to dump into these "regional" conflicts that are their bread and butter for just that reason. I'm not saying this war is going to go on forever, just that the usual break point of "too many casualties" that gets small nations to stop a war for lack of manpower or non oligarchical ones to stop for actually being able to pressure the state to stop wasting lives? Those don't exist here. Russia doesn't give a fuck about losses from a humanitarian angle and still has more than enough to keep sending in for another year, at least, until everyone gets tired of watching the circus and isn't paying attention as Russia slinks away with a token chunk of territory, calls it a success, and the whole thing starts all over again in some other "contested" area.

Look, Russia just does not have the population size to fight that way, period. And those types of troops make poor soldiers, as we've seen. Much of their population are aging drunkards. Russia is not going to be able to perform adequately, let alone win, a modern war fighting like that. And the Russian people are only going to take being inconvenienced for so long by a war they themselves don't see the point in. And this is not even getting into the fact that the men on the ground doing the fighting no doubt have crumbling morale, risking mass mutinies and troops simply surrendering or deserting.

 

[Mr E. Grifter]

It definitely illustrates the enhanced development opportunities that Ukraine is providing arms manufacturers, which pairs well with innate Ukrainian nigger-rigging skills.

And it looks like they've already been used against the Russians, who've also recovered identifiable missile fragments.

Spoiler: Yet can't figure out how to wear boots

View attachment 3287428View attachment 3287430

View attachment 3287434

For all their wunderwaffen shit with their Hyper-sonics, "stealth jets" and T-14s, Russian PGMs seem to be a lot less capable than a nearly out of date British missile derivative from 20 fucking years ago. It's genuinely quite embarrassing, they were really designing their forces to deal with NATO these are the exact capabilities they would be expecting of their enemy, actually this but fired from a jet flying low enough to avoid their radars which have all been identified and plotted via the use of RJs... Instead of just off of the back of a truck.

The Russians should just give up, save face by saying we were just joking, could have won in a day, just testing ya etc etc. It'll be less embarrassing than what's coming for them.

 

[Snekposter]

Last month I heard something about the UK sending Brimstones to Ukraine, and I initially thought they'd be limited to use with fixed or rotary-wing platforms (i.e. drones & helos) and naval assets; given that the missile is fairly large, being essentially an upgraded Hellfire.

Uh... Hellfire isn't that big at all. Early test fire from a Humvee down below:

Its only 180mm in diameter, 100 pounds or so. Brimstone about the same. Could be crew served on a tripod in a very, very big emergency. There's also been fire-and-forget millimetric seeker versions of it, and I believe the L is still in service for that reason, not replaced by the SALH-only Romeo version. Which wound up receiving a modernized dual-system seeker as part of the JAGM program in 2015 or so according to Wikipedia, so any L versions in storage are probably getting used for live-fire training.

In 2015, the Army issued an RFP for a JAGM guidance section upgrade. Lockheed Martin was to offer its dual-mode laser and millimeter wave radar seeker, and Raytheon may submit its tri-mode seeker which adds imaging infrared if it chooses to compete. Lockheed Martin was awarded a $66 million engineering and manufacturing contract to combine its laser and millimeter wave seekers into the Hellfire Romeo missile body. Raytheon chose not to compete but retains its tri-mode seeker should the Army request it.

IIRC the Stryker SHORAD can also fire Hellfires as part of its modular weapons package. Its a nifty little weapon.

 

[Tovarisz]

. And those types of troops make poor soldiers,

So... Are they saving good soldiers for Phase IV or V of the invasion? Because the way it looks, their military might as well be nothing but drunk penal legions already.

I imagine Phase IV is "Ukraine was a feign, we're actually invading Finland in retaliation for wanting to join NATO" maybe that would explain not sending in their best.

 

[OG Swolemaster]

Uh... Hellfire isn't that big at all. Early test fire from a Humvee down below:

Its only 180mm in diameter, 100 pounds or so.

That's on the larger end as far as ground launched anti-tank missiles go. The smallest thing its closest Russian counterpart(9M123) is mounted on is a BMP-3 hull.

Could be crew served on a tripod in a very, very big emergency.

I don't think anyone other than Norway has man-portable fire control units for their Hellfires, and even then they only use them for coastal defense.

 

[Ponderous Pillock]

In 1987 the USS Samuel B Roberts, a dinky OHP frigate, hit a mine that tore a 20-foot hole in the side, flooded the engine room, ripped the main engines off their mounts, and broke the keel. Well trained sailors flex taped that shit together and limped it to Bahrain. It never even lost combat capability as the radars and missiles stayed on line.

The flagship of the Russian Black Sea Fleet, a guided missile cruiser three times the size of the Sammy B, catches two 330lb warheads. Loses main power. Damage control doesn't know what the fuck. Fails to counter-flood. Fire. Sinks.

Yeah, I'm gonna say that's a staffing issue there.

The OHPs and other frigates around that time were also designed around the 60s 70s pivot away from huge capital ships because everyone in the West realised they were far too bloody expensive to maintain, and really, one square foot missed in the armour belt the thing was fucked anyway, usually quite violently as the Royal Navy found out in WW2. This increased survivability in some ways by the new structuring and podding of bulkheads inside ships as well as changes to buoyancy designs to heighten the ships survivability rating while also ensuring it could be made with cheaper materials. It also meant losses could be better controlled. It's why the US and UK navies moved almost exclusively to Destroyers as their main all rounders and many other global navies moved to Frigates or even Corvettes, with the UK now once again eyeing up bodging a Corvette sized vessel into a global reach ship thanks to yet more tech advancements meaning they need to become single HQ ships controlling Unmanned Vehicle Swarms.

The Moskava did not. It was built along that outdated route. The ten planned took so long to even figure out properly only 3 got built and its proven to be an expensive floating ornament and artificial reef.

I believe the UK developed the launcher, speculation online is that it is based off of an old testbed for the Brimstone. Fairly impressed to throw something like that together in such a short amount of time.

IIRC, Brimstone were developed from Hellfire, but the extensive upgrades mean while they share a similar look they are in effect very different weapons. Brimstone is fire and forget, and is much more accurate in targeting. Given the fact they will be used from these trailers, and thus launched from the ground, their low altitude combined with the poor performance of Russia mobile air defense systems seen so far in the conflict means I would expect these things to fuck up Russian armour,... not that the Ukrainians need that much help with that these days.

Someone designed that thing while bored 20+ years ago and probably excitedly threw off the dust of the book he'd scribbled it in to hand it over. The Brimstone has a "Dialable" warhead (Hence why its use in places like Afghnanistan, Iraq and Syria meant less casualties) they're great against just about any ground target you can think of, from a single Hajji in a car through to a fucking bitch ass bunker buster. The American responce was to make that sword-deploying Hellfire varient.
But yeah, this war has also highlighted that Russian weapons development and refinement died some time in the 1970s if not early 1980s while the rest of us carried the fuck on refining lethality the Russians kind of... didn't. Threat assessments out of the UK MoD have wildly changed and there's a lot of likely distruct from people out of the Russians Desks who clearly overstated shit, or swallowed Russian propaganda to keep their jobs.

So... Are they saving good soldiers for Phase IV or V of the invasion? Because the way it looks, their military might as well be nothing but drunk penal legions already.

I imagine Phase IV is "Ukraine was a feign, we're actually invading Finland in retaliation for wanting to join NATO" maybe that would explain not sending in their best.

Who knows by this point? The Russians seemed busy scraping the interior on the quiet to avoid actual Russians from the Cities as well as prisons because nobody gives a fuck about those places. Don't be surprised if there's suddenly mass arrests and quick justice when things get very desperate for them.


Meanwhile, meet Max, the Ukranian EOD Officer who helped fuck up the bridge.

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1524506104192974849.html

 

[Mr E. Grifter]

Someone designed that thing while bored 20+ years ago and probably excitedly threw off the dust of the book he'd scribbled it in to hand it over. The Brimstone has a "Dialable" warhead (Hence why its use in places like Afghnanistan, Iraq and Syria meant less casualties) they're great against just about any ground target you can think of, from a single Hajji in a car through to a fucking bitch ass bunker buster. The American responce was to make that sword-deploying Hellfire varient.
But yeah, this war has also highlighted that Russian weapons development and refinement died some time in the 1970s if not early 1980s while the rest of us carried the fuck on refining lethality the Russians kind of... didn't. Threat assessments out of the UK MoD have wildly changed and there's a lot of likely distruct from people out of the Russians Desks who clearly overstated shit, or swallowed Russian propaganda to keep their jobs.

Oh yeah, I mean you hear stories of the things killing the people in the backseat of a vehicle and leaving the driver alive.

I think when it comes to conventional Russia forces this is certainly the case, might be slightly different when it comes to more strategic capabilities. Their hypersonic capabilities could cause some damage as it would be difficult to intercept them, and submarines would have the potential to cause a headache in the atlantic.

With that said, their kit isn't that bad - if updated, well maintained and used by appropriately trained personnel. I think the shock is less what materiel they have available, it will shock noone in the business that their huge fleets of mothball tanks are largely useless, but certainly the incompetence of their armed forces from the ground up is a shocker. Especially given we have seen Russia forces operate effectively, in Ukraine in 2014 and in Syria since their intervention.

 

[Astro Galactic Megalul]

Apparently an entire unit of Rossguards got wiped out and all their dogs run away. They are Belgian Shepherds, the one in the clip is 3 y.o. and excellent phys shape.

View attachment 3208970


One villager says he put out food for another dog who kept hanging around, for several days, before the dog came to his yard and they became best friends.

I'm not a dog person, but those shepherds are truly magnificent and noble creatures and it looks like they all found better homes.




All 5million of stamps with Russian ship are sold out. I've seen some on eBay to go for obscene amounts of money, with one stamp going well over 100$. In Ukraine, you could buy them at face value, but from what I heard, you literally had to stay in line an entire day. (I believe W marking is international postage as oppose to domestic circulation)

Now a new round of updated design:

View attachment 3208985

Basically necroposting, but this puts new meaning into shitposting

 

[Pocket Dragoon]

View attachment 3287561

That's almost exactly the same type of launcher I saw briefly in the Ukrainian Brimstone-test footage, except mounted on a trailer w/ generator; and the missileers were using a man-portable console & controls (like Stugna).

Makes me think the US & UK has been sending them all sorts of older stuff that was mature & advanced for the time, but never used as intended (probably for budgetary reasons mostly).

 

[Snekposter]

That's almost exactly the same type of launcher I saw briefly in the Ukrainian Brimstone-test footage, except mounted on a trailer w/ generator; and the missileers were using a man-portable console & controls (like Stugna).

Makes me think the US & UK has been sending them all sorts of older stuff that was mature & advanced for the time, but never used as intended (probably for budgetary reasons mostly).

Budget and lets be honest, political reasons. Any sort of semi-active weapon is piss-easy to mount just about anywhere, and all you need after that is some sort of designation system, which doesn't even have to be on or near the launcher so long as the missile can find the reflections. Hell, you could turn a Humvee into a nasty support system, just strap a rocket to a JDAM Tiny Tim style and let the Humvee's GPS system feed coordinates to the rocket, but nooooo, that would make sense and be too easy. We can't give the enemy ideas. We must make expensive, dedicated boondoggle systems.

 

[No. 7 cat]

That Felton video (strange seeing him cover something besides WW2 stuff) raises an interesting point. Since the Russians haven't formally declared war does that mean they are financially responsible for non Ukraine property they are destroying? I know the US wrote cheques for breaking 3rd party shit in Iraq, but I'm sure the Russians will try to weasel out from their chimpery.

His recent Falklands War vids are an example where he covers non WW2 stuff, usually Great War and UK relevant stuff. They're good and don't suffer from the ad revenue length bloat of some history YouTubers. Putin's mouthpieces did verbally attack the Azeris (who are not remotely friendly over the Armenia issue) and Kazakhstan but at least for the latter Russia will surely
compensate, unless, I dunno, the CIA or the Ukrainians, da Jooz or the Illuminati or the Trilateral Commission or the Rockerfellers or a sneaky gnat stuck some sort of 'destroy Russia' chip into Putin.

 

[The Demon Pimp of Razgriz]

So... Are they saving good soldiers for Phase IV or V of the invasion? Because the way it looks, their military might as well be nothing but drunk penal legions already.

I imagine Phase IV is "Ukraine was a feign, we're actually invading Finland in retaliation for wanting to join NATO" maybe that would explain not sending in their best.

Their good troops are already dead, having escaped the prison that is Russia the only way they know how.

 

[Mr E. Grifter]

That Felton video (strange seeing him cover something besides WW2 stuff) raises an interesting point. Since the Russians haven't formally declared war does that mean they are financially responsible for non Ukraine property they are destroying? I know the US wrote cheques for breaking 3rd party shit in Iraq, but I'm sure the Russians will try to weasel out from their chimpery.

There was some speculation amongst OSINT Twitter that apparently Moscow had rebuffed someone - presumably the Americans - saying they would never be the ones to surrender in Ukraine.

I genuinely think that as Russia runs out of steam in the East, as their constant downward revision of war aims seems to suggest, that the outcome of this for Russia is looking increasingly uncertain. Their leaderships inability to save face means they lack the ability to withdraw, and so it seems that Putin is locked into a sort of sunk cost fallacy whilst also recognising that a general mobilisation within Russia would be incredibly risky, and on the face of it would not be much help in Ukraine for a long time to come.

If the defeat of Russia forces is catastrophic, then without occupied territories what does Russia have to bargain with? Ukraine, through the help of the West, essentially has the ability to hold access to international markets over the head of Russia indefinitely. It may make financial sense to pay up some amount of reparations, although I would imagine it would be political suicide for Putin, or perhaps even any potential successor.