Russia Invades Ukraine. Volume 4

[eharding]

OutInTheShed said:

If we believed all the bullst about how inferior Russia is supposed to be, we'd expect them to be retreating to the arse end of Siberia before now.
The truth is somewhat different.

If you'd actually believed all of the bullst about the apparent effectiveness of the Russian military on the 23rd of February 2022, you'd be giving your head a wobble and wondering why the still haven't prevailed, and have suffered catastrophic losses of men and equipment, and also experienced and armed insurrection attempt?

The truth is that the Russian-influenced factions in the GOP have managed to hold up US funding for ammunition to the Ukraine the for the past few months, and Ukraine has suffered as a result - we're seeing that coming to an end, for the time at least, and I expect the Russians to likewise suffer heavily as a result, and the more heavily, the better.

[Oliver Hardy]

eharding said:

OutInTheShed said:

If we believed all the bullst about how inferior Russia is supposed to be, we'd expect them to be retreating to the arse end of Siberia before now.
The truth is somewhat different.

If you'd actually believed all of the bullst about the apparent effectiveness of the Russian military on the 23rd of February 2022, you'd be giving your head a wobble and wondering why the still haven't prevailed, and have suffered catastrophic losses of men and equipment, and also experienced and armed insurrection attempt?

The truth is that the Russian-influenced factions in the GOP have managed to hold up US funding for ammunition to the Ukraine the for the past few months, and Ukraine has suffered as a result - we're seeing that coming to an end, for the time at least, and I expect the Russians to likewise suffer heavily as a result, and the more heavily, the better.

Considering the size of the Russian military they should be stronger.

Yet we keep hearing about the gains they made while Ukraine awaited funding yet it only 400sq miles, minus what they lost with the incursion the Ukrainians made into Russia with the Free Russian Army?

What surprises me is that the Russians are sending men to be gunned down so they can pin point Ukrainian postions and there isn't a revolt from them?

[Digga]

Oliver Hardy said:

Considering the size of the Russian military they should be stronger.

Yet we keep hearing about the gains they made while Ukraine awaited funding yet it only 400sq miles, minus what they lost with the incursion the Ukrainians made into Russia with the Free Russian Army?

What surprises me is that the Russians are sending men to be gunned down so they can pin point Ukrainian postions and there isn't a revolt from them?

The only thing that surprises me is that you are the least bit surprised.

This is Russian military tactics 101. Sadly, the majority of people recruited are poorly educated and with few other prospects. They all believe the state media. They have been educated to believe Russia is the main player. They do not question.

[TGCOTF-dewey]

I watched the BBC reporting on the US vote over the weekend on YouTube.

The comments were equally surprising and disapointing.

The vast majority were hugely negative about the outcome (from British and US citizens) and centered on how it was outrageous that the money was being spent given that US is so much in debt and has so many poor people living there.

I do think the west has fked up this message. The numbers reported are nowhere near that in reality, but don't sound as good when politically posturing.

[Digga]

On the one hand, I am very disappointed with the attitudes within the USA on support for Ukraine.

However, on the other hand, I can see they are suffering from conflict fatigue. There have very obviously been huge sums and many US lives sacrificed for really not very much actaul return. For many in the services - UK as well as USA - the withdrawal from Afghanistan, after so much blood spilled, was a git punch. Add in Iraq, Libya, Syria, Somalia etc. etc. What did we really gain or achieve in many of these conflicts?

[GlenMH]

Digga said:

On the one hand, I am very disappointed with the attitudes within the USA on support for Ukraine.

However, on the other hand, I can see they are suffering from conflict fatigue. There have very obviously been huge sums and many US lives sacrificed for really not very much actaul return. For many in the services - UK as well as USA - the withdrawal from Afghanistan, after so much blood spilled, was a git punch. Add in Iraq, Libya, Syria, Somalia etc. etc. What did we really gain or achieve in many of these conflicts?

I agree with all of that. "Why should we send our kids to die in a foreign field?" is a very valid question and it all stems from the lack of clarity around 2 key questions that the west is not very good at answering: "what does success or 'victory' look like?" and "what needs to be in place to allow us to withdraw?"

And the first one is very much in play for the US in the Ukrainian conflict, and certainly the answer isn't the same as the one that the Ukranians would give you.

[TGCOTF-dewey]

GlenMH said:

Digga said:

On the one hand, I am very disappointed with the attitudes within the USA on support for Ukraine.

However, on the other hand, I can see they are suffering from conflict fatigue. There have very obviously been huge sums and many US lives sacrificed for really not very much actaul return. For many in the services - UK as well as USA - the withdrawal from Afghanistan, after so much blood spilled, was a git punch. Add in Iraq, Libya, Syria, Somalia etc. etc. What did we really gain or achieve in many of these conflicts?

I agree with all of that. "Why should we send our kids to die in a foreign field?" is a very valid question and it all stems from the lack of clarity around 2 key questions that the west is not very good at answering: "what does success or 'victory' look like?" and "what needs to be in place to allow us to withdraw?"

And the first one is very much in play for the US in the Ukrainian conflict, and certainly the answer isn't the same as the one that the Ukranians would give you.

Which is why the west is getting the public message wrong. Paying 62bn + whatever Europe spends reduces the risk of western forces fighting and dying in a conflict against Russia.

[Digga]

TGCOTF-dewey said:

GlenMH said:

Digga said:

On the one hand, I am very disappointed with the attitudes within the USA on support for Ukraine.

However, on the other hand, I can see they are suffering from conflict fatigue. There have very obviously been huge sums and many US lives sacrificed for really not very much actaul return. For many in the services - UK as well as USA - the withdrawal from Afghanistan, after so much blood spilled, was a git punch. Add in Iraq, Libya, Syria, Somalia etc. etc. What did we really gain or achieve in many of these conflicts?

I agree with all of that. "Why should we send our kids to die in a foreign field?" is a very valid question and it all stems from the lack of clarity around 2 key questions that the west is not very good at answering: "what does success or 'victory' look like?" and "what needs to be in place to allow us to withdraw?"

And the first one is very much in play for the US in the Ukrainian conflict, and certainly the answer isn't the same as the one that the Ukranians would give you.

Which is why the west is getting the public message wrong. Paying 62bn + whatever Europe spends reduces the risk of western forces fighting and dying in a conflict against Russia.

I do agree, but it's nonetheless understandable, to a degree, that there's such staunch anti-war feeling. The sort of voters Trump attracts will also be the ones who saw husbands, wives, sons, daughters going into service and know the cost.

Thanks, in no small part to Holywood, the costs to non-American lives are not going unnoticed too.

[minimoog]

Digga said:

I do agree, but it's nonetheless understandable, to a degree, that there's such staunch anti-war feeling. The sort of voters Trump attracts will also be the ones who saw husbands, wives, sons, daughters going into service and know the cost.

The ones Trump refers to as suckers and losers you mean?

[Digga]

minimoog said:

Digga said:

I do agree, but it's nonetheless understandable, to a degree, that there's such staunch anti-war feeling. The sort of voters Trump attracts will also be the ones who saw husbands, wives, sons, daughters going into service and know the cost.

The ones Trump refers to as suckers and losers you mean?

I pass no comment on any politician, other than to say most are, to varying degrees, both self-serving and compromised.

[Rumblestripe]

TGCOTF-dewey said:

GlenMH said:

Digga said:

On the one hand, I am very disappointed with the attitudes within the USA on support for Ukraine.

However, on the other hand, I can see they are suffering from conflict fatigue. There have very obviously been huge sums and many US lives sacrificed for really not very much actaul return. For many in the services - UK as well as USA - the withdrawal from Afghanistan, after so much blood spilled, was a git punch. Add in Iraq, Libya, Syria, Somalia etc. etc. What did we really gain or achieve in many of these conflicts?

I agree with all of that. "Why should we send our kids to die in a foreign field?" is a very valid question and it all stems from the lack of clarity around 2 key questions that the west is not very good at answering: "what does success or 'victory' look like?" and "what needs to be in place to allow us to withdraw?"

And the first one is very much in play for the US in the Ukrainian conflict, and certainly the answer isn't the same as the one that the Ukranians would give you.

Which is why the west is getting the public message wrong. Paying 62bn + whatever Europe spends reduces the risk of western forces fighting and dying in a conflict against Russia.

The other point is that the $62bn is (mostly) being spent in the US and EU. ATACMS missiles are a good case in point, there are I am led to believe thousands of these in the US inventory. When they are donated to Ukraine, firstly the cost of decommissioning the old missiles is saved and then the replacement missiles are manufactured in the US creating jobs and putting that money into the US economy. (It also will boost the shares of the companies)

On that point I heard that within hours of the bill passing in the US, trucks full of PAC2 and PAC3 missiles for the Patriot SAM systems rolled across the borders into Ukraine.

[J4CKO]

Rumblestripe said:

TGCOTF-dewey said:

GlenMH said:

Digga said:

On the one hand, I am very disappointed with the attitudes within the USA on support for Ukraine.

However, on the other hand, I can see they are suffering from conflict fatigue. There have very obviously been huge sums and many US lives sacrificed for really not very much actaul return. For many in the services - UK as well as USA - the withdrawal from Afghanistan, after so much blood spilled, was a git punch. Add in Iraq, Libya, Syria, Somalia etc. etc. What did we really gain or achieve in many of these conflicts?

I agree with all of that. "Why should we send our kids to die in a foreign field?" is a very valid question and it all stems from the lack of clarity around 2 key questions that the west is not very good at answering: "what does success or 'victory' look like?" and "what needs to be in place to allow us to withdraw?"

And the first one is very much in play for the US in the Ukrainian conflict, and certainly the answer isn't the same as the one that the Ukranians would give you.

Which is why the west is getting the public message wrong. Paying 62bn + whatever Europe spends reduces the risk of western forces fighting and dying in a conflict against Russia.

The other point is that the $62bn is (mostly) being spent in the US and EU. ATACMS missiles are a good case in point, there are I am led to believe thousands of these in the US inventory. When they are donated to Ukraine, firstly the cost of decommissioning the old missiles is saved and then the replacement missiles are manufactured in the US creating jobs and putting that money into the US economy. (It also will boost the shares of the companies)

On that point I heard that within hours of the bill passing in the US, trucks full of PAC2 and PAC3 missiles for the Patriot SAM systems rolled across the borders into Ukraine.

Would love to know what's going on in the background, I wonder if those trucks would have turned round had the bill been rejected ?

Was the bill ever actually ever going to not get passed based on that, certain foregone conclusion feel hearing that snippet.

I was pleased it went through, but would be even more pleased if it didnt have to, would love to wake up one morning and read its been settled, preferably with video proof of Putin meeting a grisly end, he is a such a fanny, will send young men to their deaths in the thousands, yet protects himself so carefully despite projecting how tough he is, utter pussy.

[WyrleyD]

This may have been mentioned before but I would have thought that the NATO countries would welcome the chance to test new weapons systems in a live situation in the field. I suppose they may be and it just isn't made public knowledge.

[Rumblestripe]

WyrleyD said:

This may have been mentioned before but I would have thought that the NATO countries would welcome the chance to test new weapons systems in a live situation in the field. I suppose they may be and it just isn't made public knowledge.

Why do you think there are so many NATO "observers" in Ukraine?

[Cheib]

Rumblestripe said:

WyrleyD said:

This may have been mentioned before but I would have thought that the NATO countries would welcome the chance to test new weapons systems in a live situation in the field. I suppose they may be and it just isn't made public knowledge.

Why do you think there are so many NATO "observers" in Ukraine?

I am sure that's why the UK is hopefully sending Dragon Fire out there....they can probably achieve in six months in Ukraine what it would take years to do on a firing range.

Not just weapons systems though the knowledge that has been gathered about Russian military protocols and tactics will be incredibly valuable.

[Digga]

Cheib said:

Not just weapons systems though the knowledge that has been gathered about Russian military protocols and tactics will be incredibly valuable.

Tactics like donkey Lavrov's weekly, Sunday evening armageddon threat?

[Cheib]

TGCOTF-dewey said:

GlenMH said:

Digga said:

On the one hand, I am very disappointed with the attitudes within the USA on support for Ukraine.

However, on the other hand, I can see they are suffering from conflict fatigue. There have very obviously been huge sums and many US lives sacrificed for really not very much actaul return. For many in the services - UK as well as USA - the withdrawal from Afghanistan, after so much blood spilled, was a git punch. Add in Iraq, Libya, Syria, Somalia etc. etc. What did we really gain or achieve in many of these conflicts?

I agree with all of that. "Why should we send our kids to die in a foreign field?" is a very valid question and it all stems from the lack of clarity around 2 key questions that the west is not very good at answering: "what does success or 'victory' look like?" and "what needs to be in place to allow us to withdraw?"

And the first one is very much in play for the US in the Ukrainian conflict, and certainly the answer isn't the same as the one that the Ukranians would give you.

Which is why the west is getting the public message wrong. Paying 62bn + whatever Europe spends reduces the risk of western forces fighting and dying in a conflict against Russia.

The US is getting plenty for its $62bil… Russian armed forces masssively depleted, multi year LNG contracts to supply European countires with gas to replace Russian gas, German industry which is a very significant competitor of US companies in sectors like precision engineering now paying much higher energy prices and the strong $.


The US conspiracy theory loons are all over social media saying the politicians are all getting massive bribes to pass the legislation. The mindset of some sectors of US society is quite incredible…….

[Oliver Hardy]

Rumblestripe said:

TGCOTF-dewey said:

GlenMH said:

Digga said:

On the one hand, I am very disappointed with the attitudes within the USA on support for Ukraine.

However, on the other hand, I can see they are suffering from conflict fatigue. There have very obviously been huge sums and many US lives sacrificed for really not very much actaul return. For many in the services - UK as well as USA - the withdrawal from Afghanistan, after so much blood spilled, was a git punch. Add in Iraq, Libya, Syria, Somalia etc. etc. What did we really gain or achieve in many of these conflicts?

I agree with all of that. "Why should we send our kids to die in a foreign field?" is a very valid question and it all stems from the lack of clarity around 2 key questions that the west is not very good at answering: "what does success or 'victory' look like?" and "what needs to be in place to allow us to withdraw?"

And the first one is very much in play for the US in the Ukrainian conflict, and certainly the answer isn't the same as the one that the Ukranians would give you.

Which is why the west is getting the public message wrong. Paying 62bn + whatever Europe spends reduces the risk of western forces fighting and dying in a conflict against Russia.

The other point is that the $62bn is (mostly) being spent in the US and EU. ATACMS missiles are a good case in point, there are I am led to believe thousands of these in the US inventory. When they are donated to Ukraine, firstly the cost of decommissioning the old missiles is saved and then the replacement missiles are manufactured in the US creating jobs and putting that money into the US economy. (It also will boost the shares of the companies)

On that point I heard that within hours of the bill passing in the US, trucks full of PAC2 and PAC3 missiles for the Patriot SAM systems rolled across the borders into Ukraine.

Bill hasn't passed yet, needs to go through Senate and hen be sighed off by Joe Bidden.

[Oliver Hardy]

Digga said:

Oliver Hardy said:

Considering the size of the Russian military they should be stronger.

Yet we keep hearing about the gains they made while Ukraine awaited funding yet it only 400sq miles, minus what they lost with the incursion the Ukrainians made into Russia with the Free Russian Army?

What surprises me is that the Russians are sending men to be gunned down so they can pin point Ukrainian postions and there isn't a revolt from them?

The only thing that surprises me is that you are the least bit surprised.

This is Russian military tactics 101. Sadly, the majority of people recruited are poorly educated and with few other prospects. They all believe the state media. They have been educated to believe Russia is the main player. They do not question.

I would have thought this is less true of younger people?

[JNW1]

Oliver Hardy said:

Rumblestripe said:

TGCOTF-dewey said:

GlenMH said:

Digga said:

On the one hand, I am very disappointed with the attitudes within the USA on support for Ukraine.

However, on the other hand, I can see they are suffering from conflict fatigue. There have very obviously been huge sums and many US lives sacrificed for really not very much actaul return. For many in the services - UK as well as USA - the withdrawal from Afghanistan, after so much blood spilled, was a git punch. Add in Iraq, Libya, Syria, Somalia etc. etc. What did we really gain or achieve in many of these conflicts?

I agree with all of that. "Why should we send our kids to die in a foreign field?" is a very valid question and it all stems from the lack of clarity around 2 key questions that the west is not very good at answering: "what does success or 'victory' look like?" and "what needs to be in place to allow us to withdraw?"

And the first one is very much in play for the US in the Ukrainian conflict, and certainly the answer isn't the same as the one that the Ukranians would give you.

Which is why the west is getting the public message wrong. Paying 62bn + whatever Europe spends reduces the risk of western forces fighting and dying in a conflict against Russia.

The other point is that the $62bn is (mostly) being spent in the US and EU. ATACMS missiles are a good case in point, there are I am led to believe thousands of these in the US inventory. When they are donated to Ukraine, firstly the cost of decommissioning the old missiles is saved and then the replacement missiles are manufactured in the US creating jobs and putting that money into the US economy. (It also will boost the shares of the companies)

On that point I heard that within hours of the bill passing in the US, trucks full of PAC2 and PAC3 missiles for the Patriot SAM systems rolled across the borders into Ukraine.

Bill hasn't passed yet, needs to go through Senate and hen be sighed off by Joe Bidden.

The Senate have been recalled from recess to vote on this tomorrow and that should be no more than a rubber stamp (as should Biden's sign-off). So it wouldn't surprise me if some of the hardware is already on its way in anticipation of all the approvals being received - IMO it would be disappointing if that wasn't the case....