Author Topic: Ukraine  (Read 551880 times)

PeteD01

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1383
Re: Ukraine
« Reply #1650 on: May 16, 2022, 08:53:11 AM »
And ... Putin blinked again.
There will be no nuclear response to the accession of Finland and Sweden at this time:


Putin says Russia will respond if NATO bolsters Sweden, Finland militarily

By Guy Faulconbridge

"Russia, Putin said, had no problem with Finland or Sweden, so there was no direct threat from NATO enlargement which included those countries."

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/russia-calls-finland-sweden-joining-nato-mistake-with-far-reaching-consequences-2022-05-16/
« Last Edit: May 16, 2022, 09:12:37 AM by PeteD01 »

Michael in ABQ

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2626
Re: Ukraine
« Reply #1651 on: May 16, 2022, 10:03:11 AM »

Glenstache

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3493
  • Age: 94
  • Location: Upper left corner
  • FI(lean) working on the "RE"
Re: Ukraine
« Reply #1652 on: May 16, 2022, 10:07:57 AM »

Michael in ABQ

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2626
Re: Ukraine
« Reply #1653 on: May 16, 2022, 10:14:17 AM »
See also: "get better materiel."

Materiel doesn't make much of a difference when you have demotivated Soldiers, inflexible tactics/strategy, insufficient training, etc.

zolotiyeruki

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5604
  • Location: State: Denial
Re: Ukraine
« Reply #1654 on: May 16, 2022, 11:11:29 AM »
And ... Putin blinked again.
There will be no nuclear response to the accession of Finland and Sweden at this time
Wow, that's the first time I've seen him actually walk something back, rather than simply let it be forgotten.  He didn't just move the goalposts, he ripped them up, carried them out of the stadium, and moved them out to Economy Lot G

Boll weevil

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 203
Re: Ukraine
« Reply #1655 on: May 16, 2022, 11:22:40 AM »

(like their "for the children" message on a missle that hit a train station filled with civilians). 


To be fair (not that anything is in war), I’ve heard a more accurate translation was “for our children” in an avenging sense rather than the “for your children” that was implied in most of the reporting.

Moonwaves

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1943
  • Location: Germany
Re: Ukraine
« Reply #1656 on: May 16, 2022, 11:37:12 AM »
On an only slightly related and more light-hearted note, Servant of the People showed up on my netflix (Germany) today. Available with subtitles in English, French, Russian and Ukrainian. I'm halfway through the first episode and enjoying it. Standard sitcom stuff really. But so strange to have the reality of his actual presidency and the current war in my head at the same time.

pecunia

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2840
Re: Ukraine
« Reply #1657 on: May 16, 2022, 02:15:39 PM »
On an only slightly related and more light-hearted note, Servant of the People showed up on my netflix (Germany) today. Available with subtitles in English, French, Russian and Ukrainian. I'm halfway through the first episode and enjoying it. Standard sitcom stuff really. But so strange to have the reality of his actual presidency and the current war in my head at the same time.

I've seen that series.  Pay particular attention to the mentions of Putin.  In fact I thought perhaps Putin saw the series and is exacting revenge.

PeteD01

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1383
Re: Ukraine
« Reply #1658 on: May 16, 2022, 02:57:59 PM »
This is a big deal, the key map with arrows (source supposedly is ISW) is attached to my post.
I cannot verify it right now, but I cannot find any reason why one side or the other would benefit from then info being released now - well, sometimes that´s all one can get:

https://twitter.com/Nrg8000/status/1526231508914442241/photo/2
« Last Edit: May 16, 2022, 04:28:04 PM by PeteD01 »

zolotiyeruki

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5604
  • Location: State: Denial
Re: Ukraine
« Reply #1659 on: May 16, 2022, 03:57:14 PM »
This is a big deal, the key map with arrows (source supposedly is ISW) is attached to my post.
I cannot verify it right now, but I cannot find any reason why one side or the other would benefit from it - well, sometimes that´s all one can get:

https://twitter.com/Nrg8000/status/1526231508914442241/photo/2
Wow, Ukraine is getting close enough that the railroad from Belgorod is within artillery range.

former player

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8828
  • Location: Avalon
Re: Ukraine
« Reply #1660 on: May 16, 2022, 04:04:11 PM »
There's an evacuation of wounded Ukrainian soldiers from Azovstal in Mariupol going on, with a prisoner exchange for Russian POWs apparently agreed -

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/world-europe-61461805

That's big news, if the defenders of Mariupol have got an agreed safe way out.

This comes two days after Kalush Orchestra mentioned them at Eurovision; I think it's possible that the horrible optics for Russia of their actions in UKraine have become undeniable at all levels of their government and military and led to this agreement after previous ceasefire failures.  See also this -

https://twitter.com/kamilkazani/status/1526321105916641281
« Last Edit: May 16, 2022, 04:07:41 PM by former player »

Travis

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4219
  • Location: California
Re: Ukraine
« Reply #1661 on: May 16, 2022, 08:35:54 PM »
There's an evacuation of wounded Ukrainian soldiers from Azovstal in Mariupol going on, with a prisoner exchange for Russian POWs apparently agreed -

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/world-europe-61461805

That's big news, if the defenders of Mariupol have got an agreed safe way out.

This comes two days after Kalush Orchestra mentioned them at Eurovision; I think it's possible that the horrible optics for Russia of their actions in UKraine have become undeniable at all levels of their government and military and led to this agreement after previous ceasefire failures.  See also this -

https://twitter.com/kamilkazani/status/1526321105916641281

I've been following this since yesterday and it's been very confusing to sort out what is going on. From what it appears to be so far:

-50 seriously wounded being taken to a Russian-controlled hospital near the border; future disposition of these men unknown
-200 or so lightly wounded being directly exchanged for Russian POWs
-Still 1000 soldiers in the bunkers able to fight, but may also be exchanged in the coming days

Zelensky and the Azov commander both gave public statements pretty much stating that there's no reason for them to continue resistance. They delayed a large number of Russian forces for 80 days and it's time to end the siege. The goal seems to be to get everybody back into Ukrainian hands, but that will depend on Russia adhering to whatever deal is being made.

PeteD01

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1383
Re: Ukraine
« Reply #1662 on: May 17, 2022, 04:52:17 AM »
One thing Putin is really good at: finding ever more ways being an idiot.


Putin involved in war ‘at level of colonel or brigadier’, say western sources
"Vladimir Putin has become so personally involved in the Ukraine war that he is making operational and tactical decisions “at the level of a colonel or brigadier”, according to western military sources.

The Russian president is helping determine the movement of forces in the Donbas, they added, where last week the invaders suffered a bloody defeat as they tried on multiple occasions to cross a strategic river in the east of Ukraine.

The sources added that Putin is still working closely with Gen Valery Gerasimov, the commander of the Russian armed forces, in contrast to claims made by Ukraine last week that the military chief had been sidelined."


https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/may/16/putin-involved-russia-ukraine-war-western-sources

zolotiyeruki

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5604
  • Location: State: Denial
Re: Ukraine
« Reply #1663 on: May 17, 2022, 07:52:14 AM »
Wow, the comparison to Hitler keeps getting better.  Germany may well have won WWII, or at least managed a more favorable defeat, if Hitler had let his generals run the army.

MustacheAndaHalf

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 6635
Re: Ukraine
« Reply #1664 on: May 17, 2022, 08:19:25 AM »
Wow, the comparison to Hitler keeps getting better.  Germany may well have won WWII, or at least managed a more favorable defeat, if Hitler had let his generals run the army.
Wait a minute, I heard the allied invasion partly succeeded because Hitler was asleep, and nobody dared to wake him and ask to deploy tanks.

Apparently Putin has started directing the attack, taking over responsibilities that should be handled by far more junior officers.  I guess he has to with so many generals taking dirt naps.

I hope Ukrainians figure out Putin's sleep schedule, and attack during it.

zolotiyeruki

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5604
  • Location: State: Denial
Re: Ukraine
« Reply #1665 on: May 17, 2022, 08:49:23 AM »
Wow, the comparison to Hitler keeps getting better.  Germany may well have won WWII, or at least managed a more favorable defeat, if Hitler had let his generals run the army.
Wait a minute, I heard the allied invasion partly succeeded because Hitler was asleep, and nobody dared to wake him and ask to deploy tanks.

Apparently Putin has started directing the attack, taking over responsibilities that should be handled by far more junior officers.  I guess he has to with so many generals taking dirt naps.

I hope Ukrainians figure out Putin's sleep schedule, and attack during it.
hehehe, I like the way you think!

Michael in ABQ

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2626
Re: Ukraine
« Reply #1666 on: May 17, 2022, 09:01:43 AM »
I just listened to a podcast about overconfidence - specifically in men. Seems very fitting now reading about how someone who is competent in one area (politics) assuming that he is therefore competent in a completely unrelated area - military tactics and strategy.

Of course, Putin is not the first leader of a country to try and micromanage a war. I know there were stories of US presidents during Vietnam trying to do similar things - directing troops at levels that should be handled by Captains and Colonels (including Lieutenant Colonels in there). It's one thing for the President to be directly involved in a very sensitive mission like the raid on Osama Bin Laden, but there's no justification to be dealing with tactical or operational level decisions - they should strictly be at the strategic level.

LaineyAZ

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1052
Re: Ukraine
« Reply #1667 on: May 17, 2022, 09:10:56 AM »
Am I wrong, or is the element of surprise almost completely gone in 2022 given current technologies? 

It's not like you have to rely on scratchy radio transmissions or stand on a hill using binoculars to find out what's happening.  And I mentioned earlier that CNN's constant coverage is almost like a livestream.  Just wondering what all of this does to strategy. 

Michael in ABQ

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2626
Re: Ukraine
« Reply #1668 on: May 17, 2022, 09:20:22 AM »
Am I wrong, or is the element of surprise almost completely gone in 2022 given current technologies? 

It's not like you have to rely on scratchy radio transmissions or stand on a hill using binoculars to find out what's happening.  And I mentioned earlier that CNN's constant coverage is almost like a livestream.  Just wondering what all of this does to strategy.

At a strategic level it's certainly harder to hide a huge column of tanks moving from one area to another - and signaling a large offensive. Down at the tactical level though, there's only so many drones and cameras and if you're sitting in a trench, you don't have time to scroll through a million posts on Twitter to see if the guy on the other side of a tree line just posted a photo giving away his exact location.

For years the problem hasn't been a lack of information, it's processing the flood of information in a timely manner. If you think of a large drone flying at 30,000 feet beaming back real time video to a command post - you have to have multiple people to monitor that around the clock and make decisions about what you're seeing and communicate that to the right people to make timely decisions.

LaineyAZ

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1052
Re: Ukraine
« Reply #1669 on: May 17, 2022, 09:24:17 AM »
Thanks, Michael, that makes sense. 

sixwings

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 534
Re: Ukraine
« Reply #1670 on: May 17, 2022, 09:27:49 AM »
Pretty sure Russia still has to rely on the guy with binoculars on the hill...

zolotiyeruki

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5604
  • Location: State: Denial
Re: Ukraine
« Reply #1671 on: May 17, 2022, 10:30:26 AM »
Am I wrong, or is the element of surprise almost completely gone in 2022 given current technologies? 

It's not like you have to rely on scratchy radio transmissions or stand on a hill using binoculars to find out what's happening.  And I mentioned earlier that CNN's constant coverage is almost like a livestream.  Just wondering what all of this does to strategy.

At a strategic level it's certainly harder to hide a huge column of tanks moving from one area to another - and signaling a large offensive. Down at the tactical level though, there's only so many drones and cameras and if you're sitting in a trench, you don't have time to scroll through a million posts on Twitter to see if the guy on the other side of a tree line just posted a photo giving away his exact location.

For years the problem hasn't been a lack of information, it's processing the flood of information in a timely manner. If you think of a large drone flying at 30,000 feet beaming back real time video to a command post - you have to have multiple people to monitor that around the clock and make decisions about what you're seeing and communicate that to the right people to make timely decisions.
You're right--and satellites only pass over an area every once in a while, plus the imagery takes time to get downloaded and processed and analyzed, plus it's a HUGE area, plus satellite schedules are known and you can hide tanks under garages, trees, etc.  And like you say, there are only so many drones, and you have to decide where to have them scout, and hope they don't get shot down.

The story from the engineer who correctly predicted last week's river crossing attempt by the Russians didn't hinge on satellite or drone imagery, but on technical expertise and huge dollop of good luck.

TomTX

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5345
  • Location: Texas
Re: Ukraine
« Reply #1672 on: May 17, 2022, 11:48:06 AM »
The story from the engineer who correctly predicted last week's river crossing attempt by the Russians didn't hinge on satellite or drone imagery, but on technical expertise and huge dollop of good luck.

Apparently at this point Russia has tried and failed at that crossing at least 10 times.

PeteD01

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1383
Re: Ukraine
« Reply #1673 on: May 17, 2022, 06:25:48 PM »
I apologize, I accidentally posted an unfinished response.
The full post is below.


« Last Edit: May 18, 2022, 04:47:43 AM by PeteD01 »

Travis

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4219
  • Location: California
Re: Ukraine
« Reply #1674 on: May 17, 2022, 08:46:14 PM »
The story from the engineer who correctly predicted last week's river crossing attempt by the Russians didn't hinge on satellite or drone imagery, but on technical expertise and huge dollop of good luck.

Apparently at this point Russia has tried and failed at that crossing at least 10 times.

The commander of the Russian engineer brigade was one of the KIAs at the big crossing.

PeteD01

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1383
Re: Ukraine
« Reply #1675 on: May 18, 2022, 04:45:03 AM »
A few days ago, a former Russian colonel gave an excellent analysis of the war in Ukraine on Russian TV and some in the west have seen this as an important development as opinions like that are rare in the Russian media.
But they are wrong as this is just an attempt to keep the debate a Russian issue and potentially preparing the propaganda space for a face-saving retreat for the regime.
There is a tradition of self criticism in Marxism/Leninism that has always been used in two quite different ways: to purge dissenters from the party or to introduce issues that either could not be ignored anymore or arose in the minds of others in the upper echelons.
It is basically a gatekeeper strategy that makes any allowed debate one that takes places within the constraints of party orthodoxy, while allowing some, easily discreditable if the need should arise, crazy expert deviation from it. And at the same time, all undesirable debates will be suppressed.
This tradition also pays homage to a particular kind of expert veneration because, after all, Marxism/Leninism is the expert way how to run the world, and there are probably a lot of Russians who get nostalgic with that USSR stuff.
It is not evidence of major dissent but standard procedure in Marxism/Leninism to introduce a subject into public discourse using the perceivedly most neutral entry: an expert in the field.
The Russian TV audience skews older, just like in the US, and they most assuredly are not shocked when something controversial appears on TV, as that was always standard operating procedure to either steer and control the public discourse  or at least to lend legitimacy to the propaganda.

Here is how the media sees it - and it´s grotesquely beside the point, but then, they simply do not know any of this.
They are saying that the colonel's statements left his fellow panelists stunned and that opinions like his are banished from the airwaves. As far as I know, the same person gave another excellent analysis weeks before the invasion and predicted the outcome.

Here is the article from Feb 3, Google translate does a decent job:

Predictions of bloodthirsty political scientists

About enthusiastic hawks and hasty cuckoos

"FINDINGS

In general, there will be no Ukrainian blitzkrieg. The statements of some experts such as “The Russian army will defeat most of the units of the Armed Forces of Ukraine in 30-40 minutes”, “Russia is able to defeat Ukraine in 10 minutes in the event of a full-scale war”, “Russia will defeat Ukraine in eight minutes” have no serious grounds.

And finally, the most important thing. An armed conflict with Ukraine is currently fundamentally not in Russia's national interests. Therefore, it is best for some overexcited Russian experts to forget about their hatred fantasies. And in order to prevent further reputational losses, never remember again."

https://nvo.ng.ru/realty/2022-02-03/3_1175_donbass.html


It is just like in the old days: a good propaganda operation blends factual analysis and reporting with the right amount of lies - see US extremist media.
And as far as Russian TV goes, the opinions of their pundits are so extreme, calling for using nukes or extermination of Ukrainians etc., that Putin almost looks like a prudent leader. And in this context, the colonel´s analysis might actually be, among other things, reassuring to those who might have developed some doubts - at least one can be assured that these issues are known and considered by dear leader.
So, notwithstanding that the good colonel´s analysis is excellent, the fact that it was aired on TV does not indicate anything but business as usual in the Russian TV propaganda operation.
 

On a Russian talk show, a retired colonel stuns his colleagues by pointing out that the invasion isn’t going well.


"A military analyst on one of Russian state television’s most popular networks left his fellow panelists in stunned silence on Monday when he said that the conflict in Ukraine was deteriorating for Russia, giving the kind of honest assessment that is virtually banished from the official airwaves."



https://www.nytimes.com/2022/05/17/world/europe/russian-state-tv-ukraine-invasion.html
« Last Edit: May 18, 2022, 04:57:33 AM by PeteD01 »

MustacheAndaHalf

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 6635
Re: Ukraine
« Reply #1676 on: May 18, 2022, 08:31:15 AM »
I apologize, I accidentally posted an unfinished response.
The full post is below.
I'm fine with leaving out both halves.  To me this thread is more conversational, with people replying with information in context, rather than dropping pages of Google translate of Russian websites, or whatever it is you're doing.

PeteD01

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1383
Re: Ukraine
« Reply #1677 on: May 18, 2022, 09:09:20 AM »
I apologize, I accidentally posted an unfinished response.
The full post is below.
I'm fine with leaving out both halves.  To me this thread is more conversational, with people replying with information in context, rather than dropping pages of Google translate of Russian websites, or whatever it is you're doing.

I might not have made it clear enough:

Mikhail M. Khodaryonok is a Russian nationalist who was lauded yesterday by western media for his frankness regarding the Ukraine war during a Russian TV show.
This guy published a devastating opinion about the likely war outcome three weeks before the invasion in a, for us, obscure Russian publication.
So he really pops up with credibility established although he might just be a government stooge standing in wait until his services were needed.
The idea that this guy courageously defied rules on live Russian TV just to speak up and tell the Russian people the truth is beyond naive, but was picked up by western media as one of the stories of the day.
These journalists did not do due diligence and clearly do not understand how Russian propaganda works the domestic audience.

The real story is that the Russian government found it necessary to have a member of the elite taking up a position that would otherwise be taken only by regime critics or foreigners.
I think it is a rather clumsy attempt to own the position and I´m wondering how they are going to move on from here, but it is a classic move done by the book.

(For a related example, look at Kim Jong-Un´s current predicament with a surging Coronavirus outbreak: he is chastising government agencies and whatnot for having been neglectful and lazy, effectively taking the role of government critic for himself, preempting outside criticism.)

And for Khodaryonok´s February 3 article being available only in Russian, I cannot help it,  it´s written for a domestic audience (the weirdness of it and all) and was not widely distributed at the time.
« Last Edit: May 18, 2022, 09:41:23 AM by PeteD01 »

Sibley

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7428
  • Location: Northwest Indiana
Re: Ukraine
« Reply #1678 on: May 18, 2022, 10:04:40 AM »
To be perfectly honest, Russia has fucked itself. Badly.

-They've made themselves a pariah state, which is having significant impacts on their economy. Those economic impacts haven't been fully felt yet, and the time frame I've seen estimated when that's really going to hit is this fall.
-They're getting a lot of young men killed, which will only worsen their very real demographic challenges.
-Militarily, they've shown themselves to be largely a paper tiger, with the exception of nuclear weapons and even that people are questioning. They've been losing large quantities of planes, ships, trucks, and other military equipment, with no real way to replace them. Continued aggression only forces Russia to use even older equipment.
-There have been millions of Russian who have fled the country, many of them younger and educated. This also hurts - both demographically and economically.
-Russian efforts to force Europe to pay for gas, oil and electricity in rubles has resulted in massive pushes in renewables or alternate energy sources. Europe isn't coming back.

If they're going to follow a well known playbook of how to explain all of this to their people, ok? It's not going to change much in the short and medium term. If it gets Russia to stop bombing Ukraine and pull all the troops out, great. But Ukraine is still a mess and Russia is still responsible for making that mess. Even if Putin falls (and I think one way or another he will), the chances of getting someone in power that the rest of the world is remotely ok with is likely pretty low.

maizefolk

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7400
Re: Ukraine
« Reply #1679 on: May 18, 2022, 10:16:16 AM »
To be perfectly honest, Russia has fucked itself. Badly.

-They've made themselves a pariah state, which is having significant impacts on their economy. Those economic impacts haven't been fully felt yet, and the time frame I've seen estimated when that's really going to hit is this fall.

What shortages economic factors are predicted to kick in in the fall? Russia seems to be maintaining a positive balance of trade and still has active trade relationships in the big Asian economies (excluding Japan) but I'd certainly like to hear that the sanctions are likely to start biting more at some point.

Quote
-They're getting a lot of young men killed, which will only worsen their very real demographic challenges.

I don't think we're talking about enough people to really have a demographic impact (although obviously the suffering of the young men who are losing their lives or being seriously injured and their families is a big and bad thing on a human level). But we already discussed this point up thread.

Quote
-Militarily, they've shown themselves to be largely a paper tiger, with the exception of nuclear weapons and even that people are questioning. They've been losing large quantities of planes, ships, trucks, and other military equipment, with no real way to replace them. Continued aggression only forces Russia to use even older equipment.

This one I mostly agree with you on. No one is going to take Russian conventional military threats as seriously for some time to come. However who are these people who are questioning whether Russia has nuclear weapons and what are they basing that on?

Quote
-There have been millions of Russian who have fled the country, many of them younger and educated. This also hurts - both demographically and economically.

Completely agreed. The flight of young/educated people with the resources to leave is going to (and probably already is) having bad demographic and economic effects on Russia and those effects will likely be felt for decades to come.

Quote
-Russian efforts to force Europe to pay for gas, oil and electricity in rubles has resulted in massive pushes in renewables or alternate energy sources. Europe isn't coming back.

I hope you're right on this one. In terms of alternatives, it takes a long time to build nuclear plants and CNG terminals. Five years from now are European leaders still going to have the willingness to tell their voters they need to pay more for electricity and heat to avoid importing cheap natural gas from Russia? So far Europe (outside of a few countries like Poland, good for Poland!) hasn't even been willing to stop importing Russian gas during the invasion of Ukraine. 

seattlecyclone

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7254
  • Age: 39
  • Location: Seattle, WA
    • My blog
Re: Ukraine
« Reply #1680 on: May 18, 2022, 10:38:35 AM »
-Militarily, they've shown themselves to be largely a paper tiger, with the exception of nuclear weapons and even that people are questioning. They've been losing large quantities of planes, ships, trucks, and other military equipment, with no real way to replace them. Continued aggression only forces Russia to use even older equipment.

This one I mostly agree with you on. No one is going to take Russian conventional military threats as seriously for some time to come. However who are these people who are questioning whether Russia has nuclear weapons and what are they basing that on?

My completely non-expert take here: Russia claims to have a ton of tanks and other conventional equipment in reserve, but we've seen evidence that most of these "reserves" are unusable, sitting in a field somewhere rusting. I've seen suggestions that this is because the commanders used the maintenance budget to line their own pockets instead of keeping the equipment in a state of readiness. Regardless of the reasons why this is happening, do we have any reason to believe that these problems don't extend to the nuclear side of their military? I'm not interested in calling their bluff there, but I wouldn't be surprised if the number of warheads they have in usable condition is much less than they claim.

Sibley

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7428
  • Location: Northwest Indiana
Re: Ukraine
« Reply #1681 on: May 18, 2022, 11:04:30 AM »
My quoting ability is not up to this. Changing colors.

To be perfectly honest, Russia has fucked itself. Badly.

-They've made themselves a pariah state, which is having significant impacts on their economy. Those economic impacts haven't been fully felt yet, and the time frame I've seen estimated when that's really going to hit is this fall.

What shortages economic factors are predicted to kick in in the fall? Russia seems to be maintaining a positive balance of trade and still has active trade relationships in the big Asian economies (excluding Japan) but I'd certainly like to hear that the sanctions are likely to start biting more at some point.

Russia had a certain quantity of materials, parts, etc on hand. So while they're dealing with shortages they have also been able to use up what they did have. The impacts are uneven. And while yes they have continued to trade with China and India, are the logistics to those countries able to replace the prior logistics with Europe? My source is most immediately Michael Kofman (sp?). He is predicting that the full impact of the sanctions will begin to be felt in August/September if I'm remembering correctly.

More practically, it makes sense that they can limp along for some time without massive shit-hitting-the-fan events. How long can you eat from your pantry before you actually run out of food? Quite some time probably, with some pain as certain things run out but you won't starve. At some point though, you really will run out.


Quote
-They're getting a lot of young men killed, which will only worsen their very real demographic challenges.

I don't think we're talking about enough people to really have a demographic impact (although obviously the suffering of the young men who are losing their lives or being seriously injured and their families is a big and bad thing on a human level). But we already discussed this point up thread.

Agreed, it may not have a huge impact overall, but there will be some impact. I doubt anyone except Russia has the data to accurately predict.

Quote
-Militarily, they've shown themselves to be largely a paper tiger, with the exception of nuclear weapons and even that people are questioning. They've been losing large quantities of planes, ships, trucks, and other military equipment, with no real way to replace them. Continued aggression only forces Russia to use even older equipment.

This one I mostly agree with you on. No one is going to take Russian conventional military threats as seriously for some time to come. However who are these people who are questioning whether Russia has nuclear weapons and what are they basing that on?

Not counting the idiots, I have seen some light speculation about the viability of Russia's nukes as a whole. Has the maintenance been kept up? Realistically, I suspect that's wishful thinking - but also, Putin was threatening Sweden and Finland if they joined NATO. Well, Sweden and Finland are applying to join NATO and Putin's response boils down to "that's fine" from what I've read. Every time you threaten and then back down reduces the credibility of your threats.

Quote
-There have been millions of Russian who have fled the country, many of them younger and educated. This also hurts - both demographically and economically.

Completely agreed. The flight of young/educated people with the resources to leave is going to (and probably already is) having bad demographic and economic effects on Russia and those effects will likely be felt for decades to come.

Quote
-Russian efforts to force Europe to pay for gas, oil and electricity in rubles has resulted in massive pushes in renewables or alternate energy sources. Europe isn't coming back.

I hope you're right on this one. In terms of alternatives, it takes a long time to build nuclear plants and CNG terminals. Five years from now are European leaders still going to have the willingness to tell their voters they need to pay more for electricity and heat to avoid importing cheap natural gas from Russia? So far Europe (outside of a few countries like Poland, good for Poland!) hasn't even been willing to stop importing Russian gas during the invasion of Ukraine.

I would suspect that eventually, Europe will resume buying from Russia. However, it's never going to be the same quantity. They won't need it. I don't see Europe's energy needs as monolithic. I see it as the accumulation of millions of individual needs. Every solar panel that is installed, every wind turbine, every house that gets insulated, every upgrade to a more efficient furnace, will reduce the demand for natural gas. Those tiny changes will add up. If Europe collectively reduces their need for natural gas by a third (picking a random amount based on nothing), that's significant.

And I suspect the Eastern European countries that dislike Russia so strongly will not be as easily swayed by cheap natural gas. Plus, and I don't have time to find it right now, I do remember reading months ago about Russia's gas/oil production, and they're exhausting the easily extracted deposits. It costs more to get the other stuff out. It may not be cheap natural gas at some point.



Overall, my sources are an eclectic mix of: Michael Kofman (sp?) on twitter, the people he follows, the Institute of War, OISNT, and there's a podcast that has had Michael Kofman on it, War on the Rocks. The Pentagon does background briefings periodically which I at least sometimes see and read. Of course, time will really tell what happens.

Glenstache

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3493
  • Age: 94
  • Location: Upper left corner
  • FI(lean) working on the "RE"
Re: Ukraine
« Reply #1682 on: May 18, 2022, 11:06:06 AM »
-Militarily, they've shown themselves to be largely a paper tiger, with the exception of nuclear weapons and even that people are questioning. They've been losing large quantities of planes, ships, trucks, and other military equipment, with no real way to replace them. Continued aggression only forces Russia to use even older equipment.

This one I mostly agree with you on. No one is going to take Russian conventional military threats as seriously for some time to come. However who are these people who are questioning whether Russia has nuclear weapons and what are they basing that on?

My completely non-expert take here: Russia claims to have a ton of tanks and other conventional equipment in reserve, but we've seen evidence that most of these "reserves" are unusable, sitting in a field somewhere rusting. I've seen suggestions that this is because the commanders used the maintenance budget to line their own pockets instead of keeping the equipment in a state of readiness. Regardless of the reasons why this is happening, do we have any reason to believe that these problems don't extend to the nuclear side of their military? I'm not interested in calling their bluff there, but I wouldn't be surprised if the number of warheads they have in usable condition is much less than they claim.
Russia has north of 6000 nuclear warheads. If only 10% of those were viable, that is still 600-- more than enough to throw us collectively back to the stone age. The major hurdle is willingness to use them.

Radagast

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2544
  • One Does Not Simply Work Into Mordor
Re: Ukraine
« Reply #1683 on: May 18, 2022, 02:42:15 PM »
The story from the engineer who correctly predicted last week's river crossing attempt by the Russians didn't hinge on satellite or drone imagery, but on technical expertise and huge dollop of good luck.

Apparently at this point Russia has tried and failed at that crossing at least 10 times.
That's what I like about the Russians. Their disasters are more repeatable than their successes, and their motto is "If at first you don't succeed, try again." They never realized that motto is only useful if you are willing to honestly assess and address the cause of your failure.

They should put me in charge of the Russian army. I could easily lose just as badly without expending half as much effort/lives/equipment/money.

pecunia

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2840
Re: Ukraine
« Reply #1684 on: May 18, 2022, 03:30:57 PM »
I don't think like a Russian leader or any leader, but you would think even the worst manager could be able to look at this war and say the gains do not exceed the expenditure.  They would say they didn't want an expansion of NATO.  Essentially, the Ukrainians are de facto NATO soldiers and with the baby killings are likely to remain so.  The Finns and Swedes have pretty much nullified the gain that would have been achieved by bullying Ukraine into staying out.  The world knows there are few to any real Nazis there.  We can only fool our own people for so long. The loss of men and equipment increases the vulnerabilities of Russia.  Our world credit rating with the Banksters is in a bad way.  It's getting to be hassle to sell our stuff.  It's getting to be a hassle to buy the stuff we need.  We are not welcome in a lot of organizations these days.  Some of our smartest young people are leaving.

Just the same if they were on Wall Street, folks would love them as they have had the best trade surplus since 1994.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-04-11/russian-current-account-surplus-surges-to-record-on-energy-sales

From the article:

Russia recorded the largest current-account surplus since at least 1994, as revenues from oil and gas exports surged and imports plunged after the U.S. and its allies imposed sanctions over President Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine.

I guess you could say with the manpower losses in the war that they are cutting manpower and shedding unnecessary equipment. 




zolotiyeruki

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5604
  • Location: State: Denial
Re: Ukraine
« Reply #1685 on: May 18, 2022, 03:52:22 PM »
Russia recorded the largest current-account surplus since at least 1994, as revenues from oil and gas exports surged and imports plunged after the U.S. and its allies imposed sanctions over President Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine.
A trade surplus is only meaningful in an 'all else being equal' context.  I'd rather have the US's trade deficit than Russia trade surplus right now...

pecunia

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2840
Re: Ukraine
« Reply #1686 on: May 18, 2022, 04:22:03 PM »
Russia recorded the largest current-account surplus since at least 1994, as revenues from oil and gas exports surged and imports plunged after the U.S. and its allies imposed sanctions over President Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine.
A trade surplus is only meaningful in an 'all else being equal' context.  I'd rather have the US's trade deficit than Russia trade surplus right now...

Yep - Russia is further proof that trickle down economics is not reality.

Sibley

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7428
  • Location: Northwest Indiana
Re: Ukraine
« Reply #1687 on: May 18, 2022, 06:46:13 PM »
Oh this is funny: "Russian occupation authorities announced plans to destroy the Azovstal Steel Plant and turn Mariupol into a resort city, depriving Russia of some of the most important economic benefits it hoped to reap by taking the city in the first place."

They're also reporting protests against forced mobilization from the residents of the occupied cities.

https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-may-18

Sibley

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7428
  • Location: Northwest Indiana
Re: Ukraine
« Reply #1688 on: May 18, 2022, 07:07:00 PM »
@maizefolk
https://warontherocks.libsyn.com/   The "Counter-attacks..." episode, about 18 minutes in is the discussion about Russia's economy.

Abe

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2647
Re: Ukraine
« Reply #1689 on: May 18, 2022, 08:09:21 PM »
This is proving to be a good selector of non-oligarch Russians with the means and intelligence to leave rather than fall for propaganda. The possibility of getting drafted into a stupid war with a high death rate is a different scenario than having an autocrat mostly stay out of your business as long as you don't complain and throw some money at them. That, more than parts, oil, etc will be the longer-lasting effect of this fiasco.

Travis

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4219
  • Location: California
Re: Ukraine
« Reply #1690 on: May 18, 2022, 10:20:50 PM »
Oh this is funny: "Russian occupation authorities announced plans to destroy the Azovstal Steel Plant and turn Mariupol into a resort city, depriving Russia of some of the most important economic benefits it hoped to reap by taking the city in the first place."

They're also reporting protests against forced mobilization from the residents of the occupied cities.

https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-may-18

"I'm going to demolish a steel factory the size of a small city." Yeah, you and what explosives? The Russian military has been bombing that site for two months and much of it is still standing. If this factory was in the US, it would an EPA nightmare that would never be clean enough. But sure, we'll plant some trees and turn it into a park.

PeteD01

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1383
Re: Ukraine
« Reply #1691 on: May 19, 2022, 05:06:09 AM »
I apologize, I accidentally posted an unfinished response.
The full post is below.
I'm fine with leaving out both halves.  To me this thread is more conversational, with people replying with information in context, rather than dropping pages of Google translate of Russian websites, or whatever it is you're doing.

I might not have made it clear enough:

Mikhail M. Khodaryonok is a Russian nationalist who was lauded yesterday by western media for his frankness regarding the Ukraine war during a Russian TV show.
This guy published a devastating opinion about the likely war outcome three weeks before the invasion in a, for us, obscure Russian publication.
So he really pops up with credibility established, although he might just be a government stooge standing in wait until his services were needed.
The idea that this guy courageously defied rules on live Russian TV just to speak up and tell the Russian people the truth is beyond naive, but was picked up by western media as one of the stories of the day.
These journalists did not do due diligence and clearly do not understand how Russian propaganda works the domestic audience.

The real story is that the Russian government found it necessary to have a member of the elite taking up a position that would otherwise be taken only by regime critics or foreigners.
I think it is a rather clumsy attempt to own the position and I´m wondering how they are going to move on from here, but it is a classic move done by the book.

(For a related example, look at Kim Jong-Un´s current predicament with a surging Coronavirus outbreak: he is chastising government agencies and whatnot for having been neglectful and lazy, effectively taking the role of government critic for himself, preempting outside criticism.)

And for Khodaryonok´s February 3 article being available only in Russian, I cannot help it,  it´s written for a domestic audience (the weirdness of it and all) and was not widely distributed at the time.

Well, it took only 24 hours for things to become clearer:

To the astonishment of some western journalists, colonel Khodarenok apparently contradicted his so honest assessment of the war in Ukraine from the day prior, which was celebrated by some in the west as evidence of turmoil in the Russian leadership:
 
Speaking to a Russian state TV channel on Wednesday, Khodarenok said, "When people talk about Ukraine acquiring the ability to counterattack, well it's a big exaggeration. And as concerns the actions of our supreme command, there is every reason to believe that the implementation of these plans will in the very near future give Ukraine an unpleasant surprise."

The problem is that there is no contradiction whatsoever. The Kremlin needs to own the debate in the propaganda operations it controls and that is primarily Russian TV for the domestic audience.
The honest colonel is apparently tasked with making that happen and comes with the credentials of having predicted the disaster, and also by having been celebrated by some western media for his frank assessments, which should further reassure any doubters.

Going forward, supression of the bad news from Ukraine is simply not possible anymore. So he will continue to support the Kremlin in its war in Ukraine, and that will likely be interspersed with more "honest and frank" assessments, most likely followed by calls for punishment directed at the "fifth service" - at least that is my best guess.

That this guy was given so much credit in western media, for his supposedly courageous comments, handed the Kremlin a propaganda victory by not only creating the fantasy of infighting among the political elites, but also by inadvertently giving Russian TV credit for broadcasting dissenting opinions.
The truth is that dissent is not allowed on Russian TV, period.
And for that matter, the head of the fifth service, Col-General Sergei Beseda, has already been imprisoned for by now 5 weeks and was under house arrest the four weeks prior.
It is all about how to sell the bad news to Russians while clamoring for punishment of the ones found responsible.
The Russians are very good at propaganda and should not be underestimated.

« Last Edit: May 21, 2022, 04:28:22 AM by PeteD01 »

TomTX

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5345
  • Location: Texas
Re: Ukraine
« Reply #1692 on: May 19, 2022, 09:12:46 AM »
This one I mostly agree with you on. No one is going to take Russian conventional military threats as seriously for some time to come. However who are these people who are questioning whether Russia has nuclear weapons and what are they basing that on?

The Russian Military wasn't even keeping up on basic, super easy to check maintenance for supposedly ready-to-go vehicles. Rotten tires and dead batteries were very widespread. Dead batteries were one reason they ran out of fuel so fast in the Kyiv push - if you have to idle your tank 24/7 to avoid needing a jump start, you're going to burn a lot of extra fuel. Maintenance funds were being siphoned at every level.

Tritium is the version of hydrogen for a hydrogen bomb, which most are. Tritium has a half life slightly over 12 years. It's quite expensive. Without it, your hydrogen bomb won't work. It's also not easy for a non-expert to determine whether the tritium was actually refreshed, or just "pencil whipped" and the funds siphoned out. The warheads (and missiles) need other maintenance as well. Heck, the silos are probably rusted shut for most ICBMs.

Since all their nuclear weapons are 30+ years old (fall of the Soviet Union) - there's not much tritium left in them, presuming standard Russian maintenance was applied.

MustacheAndaHalf

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 6635
Re: Ukraine
« Reply #1693 on: May 19, 2022, 10:22:27 AM »
However who are these people who are questioning whether Russia has nuclear weapons and what are they basing that on?
Tritium is the version of hydrogen for a hydrogen bomb, which most are. Tritium has a half life slightly over 12 years. It's quite expensive. Without it, your hydrogen bomb won't work. It's also not easy for a non-expert to determine whether the tritium was actually refreshed, or just "pencil whipped" and the funds siphoned out. The warheads (and missiles) need other maintenance as well. Heck, the silos are probably rusted shut for most ICBMs.

Since all their nuclear weapons are 30+ years old (fall of the Soviet Union) - there's not much tritium left in them, presuming standard Russian maintenance was applied.
I haven't found information on the proportion of fission and fusion in Russia's nuclear arsenal, but I strongly suspect it is not 100% fusion.  The uranium based nukes would still be a concern.  Hydrogen bombs are much more powerful, so Russia's mention of tactical nuclear weapons on the battlefield seems much more likely to refer to fission bombs.

I'm guessing neither of us will crack Russian state secrets with a few minutes of searching online... but here's the closest I found:

"Russia has substantial economic resources of uranium, with about 9% of world reasonably assured resources"
https://world-nuclear.org/information-library/country-profiles/countries-o-s/russia-nuclear-fuel-cycle.aspx

TomTX

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5345
  • Location: Texas
Re: Ukraine
« Reply #1694 on: May 19, 2022, 03:00:07 PM »
However who are these people who are questioning whether Russia has nuclear weapons and what are they basing that on?
Tritium is the version of hydrogen for a hydrogen bomb, which most are. Tritium has a half life slightly over 12 years. It's quite expensive. Without it, your hydrogen bomb won't work. It's also not easy for a non-expert to determine whether the tritium was actually refreshed, or just "pencil whipped" and the funds siphoned out. The warheads (and missiles) need other maintenance as well. Heck, the silos are probably rusted shut for most ICBMs.

Since all their nuclear weapons are 30+ years old (fall of the Soviet Union) - there's not much tritium left in them, presuming standard Russian maintenance was applied.
I haven't found information on the proportion of fission and fusion in Russia's nuclear arsenal, but I strongly suspect it is not 100% fusion.  The uranium based nukes would still be a concern.  Hydrogen bombs are much more powerful, so Russia's mention of tactical nuclear weapons on the battlefield seems much more likely to refer to fission bombs.

I'm guessing neither of us will crack Russian state secrets with a few minutes of searching online... but here's the closest I found:

"Russia has substantial economic resources of uranium, with about 9% of world reasonably assured resources"
https://world-nuclear.org/information-library/country-profiles/countries-o-s/russia-nuclear-fuel-cycle.aspx

Sure, but the big city or ICBM-silo busting nukes are all fusion. The proposition put forth was that Russia had the capability of wiping out all major US cities.

Also note that tritium is far from the only service item. Even fission bombs need servicing over time.

MustacheAndaHalf

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 6635
Re: Ukraine
« Reply #1695 on: May 19, 2022, 03:34:17 PM »
However who are these people who are questioning whether Russia has nuclear weapons and what are they basing that on?
Tritium is the version of hydrogen for a hydrogen bomb, which most are. Tritium has a half life slightly over 12 years. It's quite expensive. Without it, your hydrogen bomb won't work. It's also not easy for a non-expert to determine whether the tritium was actually refreshed, or just "pencil whipped" and the funds siphoned out. The warheads (and missiles) need other maintenance as well. Heck, the silos are probably rusted shut for most ICBMs.

Since all their nuclear weapons are 30+ years old (fall of the Soviet Union) - there's not much tritium left in them, presuming standard Russian maintenance was applied.
I haven't found information on the proportion of fission and fusion in Russia's nuclear arsenal, but I strongly suspect it is not 100% fusion.  The uranium based nukes would still be a concern.  Hydrogen bombs are much more powerful, so Russia's mention of tactical nuclear weapons on the battlefield seems much more likely to refer to fission bombs.

I'm guessing neither of us will crack Russian state secrets with a few minutes of searching online... but here's the closest I found:

"Russia has substantial economic resources of uranium, with about 9% of world reasonably assured resources"
https://world-nuclear.org/information-library/country-profiles/countries-o-s/russia-nuclear-fuel-cycle.aspx
Sure, but the big city or ICBM-silo busting nukes are all fusion. The proposition put forth was that Russia had the capability of wiping out all major US cities.

Also note that tritium is far from the only service item. Even fission bombs need servicing over time.
Oh, you could be right about that.  Do you have a source to confirm it?

I assume most current ICBMs are multiple independent rentry vehicles (MIRV) which helps defeat defenses.  I found mention of Russian missiles that could carry 10 large or 16 smaller warheads - which suggests flexibility.  But I don't know if it's between large vs medium fusion warheads, versus fission.

Abe

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2647
Re: Ukraine
« Reply #1696 on: May 19, 2022, 08:18:57 PM »
Nuclear weapons are not easy to maintain, much harder than tanks. The fact that Russia couldn't maintain their basic weaponry isn't a strong endorsement for their nuclear systems, even assuming that the "elite" military personnel are working in nuclear-armed groups (submarines, ICBMs, etc).

Zamboni

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3882
Re: Ukraine
« Reply #1697 on: May 19, 2022, 08:24:03 PM »
I share the doubts about the viability of Russia's nuclear arsenal. But even a couple of bombs still working and getting through would be a big problem. Best to still take it seriously.

The reason for for my doubt is very simple and from direct experience:
A few years after the fall of the USSR, I worked for an American military sub-contractor. This company employs primarily chemists, chem engineers, and mechanical engineers with lots of PhD's in both fields . . . that's all I will say about it. In 97 my company sent a couple of higher up scientists on a "loot Soviet technology" tour of Russia. They talked to people in the military and places like the Russian Academy of Sciences thinking it would be a fire sale, and they came back with some ideas. 97-99 we paid to have various Russian scientists come to the US several times to meet with us about what they had, and we sent scientists there as well to investigate the best leads. When the Russian scientists were in the US, I was often put in charge of hosting them since I was young and had no family. Basically I took them to dinner every night, arranged entertainment like shows, took them shopping, etc. so I got to talk with them quite a lot in addition to working with them all day. Alas, I was young and low on the ladder and never got to go to Russia, but everyone who went confirmed what the Russian scientists said: the condition of things there in terms of financial support for science and technology was quite grim. One example I remember was that my colleague said there was a long hallway in one of their more prestigious scientific institutes in St. Petersburg that was lit by a single little light bulb when there should have been dozens along the way. Another issue that came up was that they didn't really have appropriate containers for anything, so they'd send us samples in things like an old vitamin bottle. Whenever we sent them supplies, we also needed to provide ample bribe money so they could retrieve their items from customs.

Bottom line, corruption was rampant, every man was for himself, every scientist who wasn't at the tip top of the "on the take" pyramid wanted us to help get them out of there, and all money was being stripped away from their scientific efforts and poured into the coffers of the men who are now the oligarchs.

It's just hard for me to imagine how you'd keep a nuclear arsenal in tip top shape in that environment . . .

Sibley

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7428
  • Location: Northwest Indiana
Re: Ukraine
« Reply #1698 on: May 19, 2022, 08:29:54 PM »
@Zamboni   Did many of those scientists leave Russia? You may not know of course, but curious.

partgypsy

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5207
Re: Ukraine
« Reply #1699 on: May 20, 2022, 07:31:57 AM »
To be perfectly honest, Russia has fucked itself. Badly.

-They've made themselves a pariah state, which is having significant impacts on their economy. Those economic impacts haven't been fully felt yet, and the time frame I've seen estimated when that's really going to hit is this fall.
-They're getting a lot of young men killed, which will only worsen their very real demographic challenges.
-Militarily, they've shown themselves to be largely a paper tiger, with the exception of nuclear weapons and even that people are questioning. They've been losing large quantities of planes, ships, trucks, and other military equipment, with no real way to replace them. Continued aggression only forces Russia to use even older equipment.
-There have been millions of Russian who have fled the country, many of them younger and educated. This also hurts - both demographically and economically.
-Russian efforts to force Europe to pay for gas, oil and electricity in rubles has resulted in massive pushes in renewables or alternate energy sources. Europe isn't coming back.

If they're going to follow a well known playbook of how to explain all of this to their people, ok? It's not going to change much in the short and medium term. If it gets Russia to stop bombing Ukraine and pull all the troops out, great. But Ukraine is still a mess and Russia is still responsible for making that mess. Even if Putin falls (and I think one way or another he will), the chances of getting someone in power that the rest of the world is remotely ok with is likely pretty low.
  The problem is, according to my Russian friend who now is American, is that the people in power, simply don't care. They don't care about the quality of life of the populace, as long as they get theirs. I remember my friend telling me over the last 15-20 years, that morale in Russia keeps getting lower and lower. She feels change in leadership, now that it has gotten to this (things are entrenched), is not going to change significantly. It's a tragedy on many fronts. I guess good news in the sense that Russia threat to Ukraine and Europe in general is not as bad (other than isolation increases paranoia). But not good news in the sense that things will improve for the Russian people.
« Last Edit: May 20, 2022, 07:42:01 AM by partgypsy »