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
 
You'd be surprised. Its not Russia cold (or even Midwestern USA cold) but Stuttgart drops down to a daily mean of less than 50F starting this month. Things will be hitting freezing at night next month, and won't warm up until March. Cologne is going to be barely above freezing until April. Berlin is almost as cold as Stuttgart. Aachen is going to be in the 30's from December until Feb, and its got borderline French climate. Things have the potential to get very, very bad if steps aren't taken, especially since the Germans were thinking they'd be able to get cheap Russian gas for heating until the end of time and planned and built accordingly.
My answer to this remains the same. Wear a coat inside and throw an extra blanket on grandma. These people don't know what cold is so they can suck it up and deal.
 
I remember someone jokingly suggesting to me fleeing on a boat to Alaska, and these madlads actually did it!
 
Shipping stuff by air is not as efficient as doing it by ship though. It's whole lot easier to send over a bunch of MLRS/HIMARS/Whatever by boat then it is by plane.
Poland has a coast and can accept US arms shipments by sea.

As far as Russian incompetence is concerned; I would be wary of assuming that would continue indefinitely. At the start of this thing; we overestimated the Ivans, we should not now make the mistake of underestimating them.

At this point even elite units like the Wagner group are using low-quality recruits for their new blood.

Tell me, where will the Russians miraculously gain some experienced soldiers?
 
Last edited:
Russia redeemed tanks despite being told not to
1665154617370.png1665154625248.png

some russians got DRONED.UA



 
Last edited:
If I had to guess, the Ukrainians cutting off the flow of water to Crimea was what ultimately led to Putin ordering this invasion. Which sorta makes sense in terms of real-politick, but then the question is why not try and bribe the Ukrainian government first?
For the same reason the West can't give in to nuclear threats. Pay the Dane geld once and he will be back the next time he's short on cash.
 
If I had to guess, the Ukrainians cutting off the flow of water to Crimea was what ultimately led to Putin ordering this invasion. Which sorta makes sense in terms of real-politick, but then the question is why not try and bribe the Ukrainian government first?
Nah, the main and only reason that matters is Putin's delusion and imperialistic ambitions. Redrawing borders was always the goal, everything else is whatever.
Time for diplomacy was probably over the moment Russia annexed Crimea and flooded Donbas with weapons and mercs, Ukraine's retaliation was justified at that point.
 
I just don't know how long Ukraine can reasonably last given that their ability to keep fighting as hard as they are is at least partially dependent on outside aid. As @Ghostse said; relying on the continued incompetence of your enemy is not necessarily a great strategy, even if it is the best one that Ukraine has right now.
It's not exactly the sort of incompetence that'd be wiped out by putting a new general in charge. US intelligence agencies apparently were agreeing with Russia that they'd take Kyiv, which means Russia's intelligence was just as competent/incompetent as America's.

The fact Ukraine was willing to fight back, surprised everyone. Much of Europe was reluctant to even do sanctions on things like the sale of luxury goods, because they figured it was inevitable that Ukraine would fall like it was nothing.

The problems Russia is dealing with can't be fixed by just putting smarter people in charge, because they've already gotten a fucked economy, corrupt military that was selling off arms, and a populace that wants to flee at the first sign of trouble coming their way. It also doesn't help that the west doesn't want to be flooded by Ukrainian refugees, so tossing them money so they can fight their own war and stay in their own country can look a lot nicer than letting Russia raise hell.

U.S. intelligence reports at the time predicted that Kyiv would fall quickly, perhaps in a week or two at the most. The predictions spurred the Biden administration to secretly withdraw some key U.S. intelligence assets from Ukraine, including covert former special operations personnel on contract with the CIA, the current and former officials said. Their account was backed up by a Naval officer and a former Navy SEAL, who were aware of the movements and who also asked not to be named because they were not authorized to speak publicly.
The CIA “got it completely wrong,” said one former senior U.S. intelligence official, who is knowledgeable about what the CIA was reporting when the Russian invasion began. “They thought Russia would win right away.”


When it became clear that the agency’s predictions of a rapid Russian victory had been wrong, the Biden administration sent the clandestine assets that had been pulled out of Ukraine back into the country, the military and intelligence officials said. One U.S. official insisted that the CIA only conducted a partial withdrawal of its assets when the war began, and that the agency “never completely left.”
 
It's not exactly the sort of incompetence that'd be wiped out by putting a new general in charge. US intelligence agencies apparently were agreeing with Russia that they'd take Kyiv, which means Russia's intelligence was just as competent/incompetent as America's.
I'd say no. American intelligence took Russia at its word, and had no reason not to, at the time. Whereas Russian intelligence bought their own propaganda and didn't even accurately survey a country which was right next door to them. It's one thing to take an enemy's word when that enemy is far from you, it's another to completely bungle the analysis of a country that's right next door.

The fact Ukraine was willing to fight back, surprised everyone. Much of Europe was reluctant to even do sanctions on things like the sale of luxury goods, because they figured it was inevitable that Ukraine would fall like it was nothing.

The problems Russia is dealing with can't be fixed by just putting smarter people in charge, because they've already gotten a fucked economy, corrupt military that was selling off arms, and a populace that wants to flee at the first sign of trouble coming their way. It also doesn't help that the west doesn't want to be flooded by Ukrainian refugees, so tossing them money so they can fight their own war and stay in their own country can look a lot nicer than letting Russia raise hell.
The problems Russia has need a few decades' worth of fixing and purging. Corrupt oligarchs that strangle the Russian economy, corrupt soldiers selling what they should be guarding, the works. They also need to invest in their own populace and help them up financially so they can gain some real confidence in their government and have something worth fighting for.
 
I'd say no. American intelligence took Russia at its word, and had no reason not to, at the time.
It means that the American intelligence wasn't doing any real intelligence work. Which should be an incredible embarrassment for them that they ended up being as informed as youtubers that watched too much Russia Today.

If I had to guess, the Ukrainians cutting off the flow of water to Crimea was what ultimately led to Putin ordering this invasion. Which sorta makes sense in terms of real-politick, but then the question is why not try and bribe the Ukrainian government first?
My guess is that Putin viewed western investment as equivalent to bribery and couldn't see Russia outdoing the west in the bribing/investing department. Putin wasn't going to get the water turned back on unless he played nice and/or paid more which he had no interest in doing.
 
I'd say no. American intelligence took Russia at its word, and had no reason not to, at the time. Whereas Russian intelligence bought their own propaganda and didn't even accurately survey a country which was right next door to them. It's one thing to take an enemy's word when that enemy is far from you, it's another to completely bungle the analysis of a country that's right next door.
It's probably more like Russian intelligence was telling Putin what he wanted to hear, because doing that is good for your career. Yeah totally Ukraine is run by Nazis and would fall in 72 hours, and the population will see us as liberators. Perverse incentives in the intelligence service is yet another feature of a corrupt, broken system.

I saw an article early in the war (I'll see if I can find it) that Russia's agencies never thought Putin would really invade so they figured they could say whatever they wanted. This is another consequence of keeping the invasion a secret, similar to how even the soldiers didn't know what was happening till Ukrainians were shooting at them.
 
Whereas Russian intelligence bought their own propaganda and didn't even accurately survey a country which was right next door to them.
I just assume at this point that until the last moment they hoped Putin wouldn't actually go through with it. And/or they're really that fucking bad.
But it goes without saying that underlings tend to tell authoritarian leader what he wants to hear rather than the truth.
 
It means that the American intelligence wasn't doing any real intelligence work. Which should be an incredible embarrassment for them that they ended up being as informed as youtubers that watched too much Russia Today.


My guess is that Putin viewed western investment as equivalent to bribery and couldn't see Russia outdoing the west in the bribing/investing department. Putin wasn't going to get the water turned back on unless he played nice and/or paid more which he had no interest in doing.
It's not that they weren't doing any work. It's simply that the core failings we hve witnessed in the Russian Military are not something easily observed or quantified by external inteligence. The US inteligence services had a pretty closeestimate on numbers of actual functional vehicles. Number of men in uniform. It's harder to quntify the shear quantity of alchohol fueled incompetance and corruption in play throughout the Russian Military. I'm sure some reports or analysis exist postulating just how bad they might be. But they get dismissed as absurd. I mean you would never willing elect to tke such an Army to war... right?
 
It's not that they weren't doing any work. It's simply that the core failings we hve witnessed in the Russian Military are not something easily observed or uantified by external inteligence.
That white paper saying Russian ground forces, as currently structured, were incapable of combat operations more than 100 kilometers(miles?) from a railhead had been around for years. It seems like the diamond a pile of coal as far as western intel prior to the invasion goes.
 
It means that the American intelligence wasn't doing any real intelligence work. Which should be an incredible embarrassment for them that they ended up being as informed as youtubers that watched too much Russia Today.
The trouble there isn't if we're doing intel work, but if the reports we're reading bear any resemblance to reality. If we're receiving the same totally honest and truthful assessments of Russian military readiness and strength the Kremlin is, why wouldn't we conclude they're capable of taking Ukraine in a week? That sort of thing is why the USA didn't expect the USSR to collapse overnight: we had sources in the Kremlin that were feeding us the same economic reports the top guys were getting... which of course were more cooked than an English meal after making their way through those endless layers of Soviet bureaucracy.
 
It's not that they weren't doing any work. It's simply that the core failings we hve witnessed in the Russian Military are not something easily observed or quantified by external inteligence. The US inteligence services had a pretty closeestimate on numbers of actual functional vehicles. Number of men in uniform. It's harder to quntify the shear quantity of alchohol fueled incompetance and corruption in play throughout the Russian Military. I'm sure some reports or analysis exist postulating just how bad they might be. But they get dismissed as absurd. I mean you would never willing elect to tke such an Army to war... right?
The trouble there isn't if we're doing intel work, but if the reports we're reading bear any resemblance to reality. If we're receiving the same totally honest and truthful assessments of Russian military readiness and strength the Kremlin is, why wouldn't we conclude they're capable of taking Ukraine in a week? That sort of thing is why the USA didn't expect the USSR to collapse overnight: we had sources in the Kremlin that were feeding us the same economic reports the top guys were getting... which of course were more cooked than an English meal after making their way through those endless layers of Soviet bureaucracy.
You can find stories of people visiting a Russian supply depot and just buying grenades for fun. Taking the official government word on what their military's status is like is just kinda stupid or at least lazy, as it means they weren't trying to get information on the ground.

The job of government spies is often just to go to places and offer a ton of money for information. It's a bit far fetched to imagine the guys running a lot of these supply depots or different elements of the Russian military would have been immune to bribery. Which means either the people on the ground doing their spying/bribing were bad at their jobs or the higher ups in that agency meant to listen to and understand that intelligence coming in were bad their jobs, either way you end up with an intelligence agency that fucked up.

It's easy enough to come up with reasons for why someone would have believed in the might of Russia or in the validity of these documents handed around to Putin, but it doesn't really excuse the fact that this was a similar fuck up to thinking Sadaam had WMDs. I mostly think of moments like these as learning experiences for how nearly all these intelligence operatives are about as insightful regarding their area of expertise as any person on here.
 
I'd read the part about russian incompetence and was gonna tell yall not to get your collective hopes up and make a parallel to what happened with the great purges and soviet command during ww2 but then i realised stalin was having people shot and shit and generally removing people from command, meanwhile Putin is probably gonna keep the same old guys in office due to political loyalty
 
The trouble there isn't if we're doing intel work, but if the reports we're reading bear any resemblance to reality. If we're receiving the same totally honest and truthful assessments of Russian military readiness and strength the Kremlin is, why wouldn't we conclude they're capable of taking Ukraine in a week? That sort of thing is why the USA didn't expect the USSR to collapse overnight: we had sources in the Kremlin that were feeding us the same economic reports the top guys were getting... which of course were more cooked than an English meal after making their way through those endless layers of Soviet bureaucracy.
To add to this, it's standard practice to assume the worst case when planning. The enemy is always motivated, their battle plans always work, the weather is always in their favour, their forces are more than what you can see, their technology works perfectly, etc etc.

Assuming an incompetent foe is what led Russia into this mess, after all.
 
>Get conscripted
>Sent to the front
>Get raped
What's with all the gay shit in this war?

Context: Vids from a pro Ukrainian telegram. Claims the guy getting raped is Russian and he's being raped by Ukrainian partisans for shooting civilians. It quickly got purged off telegram and I can't find much more on this so make of it what you will.
 
I'll throw my two cents in and say that there was an over-reliance on aerial imagery.

If you look at the air photos of Uncle Bubba's place, you might think a lot of people live there because there are fifteen cars in the yard. If you visit Uncle Bubba's place, you quickly realize that only three of the cars actually run.

It seems stupid to have to ask, "How many of these things actually work?" when you're talking about a yard with 200 tanks in it, but when it comes to the Russians, no question is too stupid.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back