Ukraine

[lemanfan]

Oh fun... now Russia has started an internal ad campaign stating that Swedish people are all nazis.  They apparently did something similar to Ukraine before starting this years invasion.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10778809/Russia-labels-SWEDEN-Nazis-join-NATO-Kremlin-claimed-Hitler-Jewish-blood.html

Sometimes, getting yelled at by the "right" person is the sign of that you're doing something right.  :)

While I haven't gone down the internet rabbit hole of how good is Sweden's military, I have on the Finnish military. And unless my brain is completely shortcircuted right now (possible), they're neighbors and they get along great. So if Russia decides to be stupid enough to attack Sweden, then they'll be facing both Sweden and Finland. And that's leaving anything to do with NATO out of it.

According to a Swedish friend of mine, Sweden and Finland have an understanding that either both will join NATO, or neither will join.  I believe it's to avoid being singled out for attack by Russia (although I wonder if Russia would really open up a war on two fronts?).

Russia couldn't manage a war on two fronts just in Ukraine.  Opening up a second front against an even better-prepared foe would be...ill-advised.  Of course, given the past couple of months, "ill-advised" doesn't mean it won't happen.

A "real" invasion war westward from Russia would probably not be on the table. They simply don't have the power now. At least not for the whole nations.  If you however look at a map for the islands of Gotland (belonging to Sweden) and possibly also Bornholm (Denmark) and Åland (Finland) you can see that a Russian military presence there would be ... effective. 

Sweden have finally, FINALLY, stepped up our own defense presence on Gotland.  Finally.

A desperate Russia that fires of their missiles from Kaliningrad can reach parts of Sweden easily (including my city).  Let's hope that Putin won't get that desperate.  I live my life as if that is not a real fact.  I focus my efforts on helping the Ukrainians.

[pecunia]

Oh fun... now Russia has started an internal ad campaign stating that Swedish people are all nazis.  They apparently did something similar to Ukraine before starting this years invasion.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10778809/Russia-labels-SWEDEN-Nazis-join-NATO-Kremlin-claimed-Hitler-Jewish-blood.html

Sometimes, getting yelled at by the "right" person is the sign of that you're doing something right.  :)

While I haven't gone down the internet rabbit hole of how good is Sweden's military, I have on the Finnish military. And unless my brain is completely shortcircuted right now (possible), they're neighbors and they get along great. So if Russia decides to be stupid enough to attack Sweden, then they'll be facing both Sweden and Finland. And that's leaving anything to do with NATO out of it.

According to a Swedish friend of mine, Sweden and Finland have an understanding that either both will join NATO, or neither will join.  I believe it's to avoid being singled out for attack by Russia (although I wonder if Russia would really open up a war on two fronts?).

Russia couldn't manage a war on two fronts just in Ukraine.  Opening up a second front against an even better-prepared foe would be...ill-advised.  Of course, given the past couple of months, "ill-advised" doesn't mean it won't happen.

A "real" invasion war westward from Russia would probably not be on the table. They simply don't have the power now. At least not for the whole nations.  If you however look at a map for the islands of Gotland (belonging to Sweden) and possibly also Bornholm (Denmark) and Åland (Finland) you can see that a Russian military presence there would be ... effective. 

Sweden have finally, FINALLY, stepped up our own defense presence on Gotland.  Finally.

A desperate Russia that fires of their missiles from Kaliningrad can reach parts of Sweden easily (including my city).  Let's hope that Putin won't get that desperate.  I live my life as if that is not a real fact.  I focus my efforts on helping the Ukrainians.

Looking at a map of Konigsberg, they may be able to get missiles off, but that may be all.  They would be attacked from all sides.

If Putin says this is now an all out war, will it make much of a difference?

[maizefolk]

But yes, NATO talks for Sweden and Finland are very much real now.  It is not uncontroversial in Sweden at least.

I am curious how threats from Russia interact with the controversy. In the USA I think having a threat from a foreign country telling us "Don't do X or else" would strength the voices arguing for X and weaken for voices arguing against X (with the implication that maybe they on foreign country's side). But I don't know how much of that is general human nature and how much is America-specific idiosyncrasies.

From what you are seeing is the dynamic the same in Sweden? Or are Russian threats moot? Or perhaps even effective at shifting the discussion more against the idea of joining NATO?

[lemanfan]

From what you are seeing is the dynamic the same in Sweden? Or are Russian threats moot? Or perhaps even effective at shifting the discussion more against the idea of joining NATO?

From what I see, the NATO-opposing side does not claim to be directly influenced by the Russian threats.  It is more old principles or general principles. Some people have been anti-NATO, anti-war, anti-nuke and anti-USA since times immemorial - they do not change their opinion quickly.   

One of the parties in the Swedish parliament now was openly communist and actually financially sponsored by the USSR up until the fall of European communism 30 years ago. That party was the only party voting against supporting the Ukrainians with munitions last month - and they lost a lot of voter sympathy for that.

The wider opinion has switched to pro-NATO very very quickly the last two months, and this is just a continuation of a wider trend the last few years.  Sweden has had military exercises together with NATO troops since several years and most people that are not on the extreme left seems to like that.

From what I see, people are more getting mad than scared right now.  I.e. the russian threats have the opposite effect, many people are more pro-NATO now.

At least in my bubble. I try to tend to stray away from the far left and the extreme right in my friend groups.

[lemanfan]

If Putin says this is now an all out war, will it make much of a difference?

Nah... not really.  Maybe.  Nukes?  Mutually assured destruction? 

One good thing about our current times is that even a authoritative ruler like Putin tries to avoid using the word "War" for his actions, and tries to uphold the illusion of a democracy with fair elections.  It doesn't save the life of the Ukrainian people or his own soldiers, but still...

[zolotiyeruki]

If Putin says this is now an all out war, will it make much of a difference?

Nah... not really.  Maybe.  Nukes?  Mutually assured destruction? 

It's a bit comforting to know that the US isn't the only country with politicians unwilling to enforce "red lines."  I mean, how many times has Putin (or is spokespeople) said "Doing X is an act of war, don't do it!"?  It happened with sanctions, it happened with Javelins, it happened with tanks and artillery and intel and... and... and... It's to the point where even if they *did* mean "don't do this or we'll nuke," nobody would take them seriously.  It's the opposite of speaking softly and carrying a big stick. 

[maizefolk]

If Putin says this is now an all out war, will it make much of a difference?

Nah... not really.  Maybe.  Nukes?  Mutually assured destruction? 

It's a bit comforting to know that the US isn't the only country with politicians unwilling to enforce "red lines."  I mean, how many times has Putin (or is spokespeople) said "Doing X is an act of war, don't do it!"?  It happened with sanctions, it happened with Javelins, it happened with tanks and artillery and intel and... and... and... It's to the point where even if they *did* mean "don't do this or we'll nuke," nobody would take them seriously.  It's the opposite of speaking softly and carrying a big stick.

I find the bolded bit terrifying rather than comforting, but agree otherwise.

[PeteD01]

If Putin says this is now an all out war, will it make much of a difference?

Nah... not really.  Maybe.  Nukes?  Mutually assured destruction? 

It's a bit comforting to know that the US isn't the only country with politicians unwilling to enforce "red lines."  I mean, how many times has Putin (or is spokespeople) said "Doing X is an act of war, don't do it!"?  It happened with sanctions, it happened with Javelins, it happened with tanks and artillery and intel and... and... and... It's to the point where even if they *did* mean "don't do this or we'll nuke," nobody would take them seriously.  It's the opposite of speaking softly and carrying a big stick.

You are absolutely right. I can pinpoint when it became clear that there was no planned response with unconventional weapons. It took them more than a week, if I recall correctly, to publicly respond and calling it an act of war - too late for a credible response. They blinked, and that was it:

... the most severe economic sanctions (or what may be better characterized as economic attacks) ever imposed on a near peer nation are in place and the objectives are the precipitation of a banking crisis and the collapse of the Russian economy.
This is unprecedented and constitutes a major challenge to the Russian leadership. Under the current circumstances, it is difficult to see how the Russian leadership could interepret this other than an act of war.
...

[pecunia]

If Putin says this is now an all out war, will it make much of a difference?

Nah... not really.  Maybe.  Nukes?  Mutually assured destruction? 

It's a bit comforting to know that the US isn't the only country with politicians unwilling to enforce "red lines."  I mean, how many times has Putin (or is spokespeople) said "Doing X is an act of war, don't do it!"?  It happened with sanctions, it happened with Javelins, it happened with tanks and artillery and intel and... and... and... It's to the point where even if they *did* mean "don't do this or we'll nuke," nobody would take them seriously.  It's the opposite of speaking softly and carrying a big stick.

I find the bolded bit terrifying rather than comforting, but agree otherwise.

Right now he has trouble getting troops (cannon fodder to some).  I thought if he made an actual "war" proclamation that he would be free to draft any and all eligible individuals.  Russia has a population of 144 million.  Ukraine has a population of around 44 million.  Putin has made a phone call to his buddy in Belarus to get his army in gear.  Belarus has a population of 9.3 million. 

Population resources are 3.5 to 1.  He seems to have a huge backlog of military equipment left from the Soviet days.  Since old Soviet equipment has been refitted for NATO, it seems as though the Soviet backlog could be renewed for use in the Ukraine conflict.

He has both lied to his people about this war and stifled them from any form of resistance to this war.  I can envision some forms of resistance beginning in Belarus if the troops are sent South to Ukraine, but I think the populace of Russia will follow lockstep.

I've read wars are often a battle of resources with soldiers being one of the chief ones.  The West can eventually exceed the military resources that Russia can supply since they don't have the capacity for renewal, but the supply of soldiers could be limited.

[Sibley]

If Putin says this is now an all out war, will it make much of a difference?

Nah... not really.  Maybe.  Nukes?  Mutually assured destruction? 

It's a bit comforting to know that the US isn't the only country with politicians unwilling to enforce "red lines."  I mean, how many times has Putin (or is spokespeople) said "Doing X is an act of war, don't do it!"?  It happened with sanctions, it happened with Javelins, it happened with tanks and artillery and intel and... and... and... It's to the point where even if they *did* mean "don't do this or we'll nuke," nobody would take them seriously.  It's the opposite of speaking softly and carrying a big stick.

I find the bolded bit terrifying rather than comforting, but agree otherwise.

Right now he has trouble getting troops (cannon fodder to some).  I thought if he made an actual "war" proclamation that he would be free to draft any and all eligible individuals.  Russia has a population of 144 million.  Ukraine has a population of around 44 million.  Putin has made a phone call to his buddy in Belarus to get his army in gear.  Belarus has a population of 9.3 million. 

Population resources are 3.5 to 1.  He seems to have a huge backlog of military equipment left from the Soviet days.  Since old Soviet equipment has been refitted for NATO, it seems as though the Soviet backlog could be renewed for use in the Ukraine conflict.

He has both lied to his people about this war and stifled them from any form of resistance to this war.  I can envision some forms of resistance beginning in Belarus if the troops are sent South to Ukraine, but I think the populace of Russia will follow lockstep.

I've read wars are often a battle of resources with soldiers being one of the chief ones.  The West can eventually exceed the military resources that Russia can supply since they don't have the capacity for renewal, but the supply of soldiers could be limited.

Maybe not entirely lockstep. There's been a LOT of fires in Russia. There's 3 main possible sources that I see: Ukraine is starting them somehow, accidental, or people inside Russia are starting them. With all the big fires and explosions, all in different parts of Russia, I can't believe they're all Ukraine. Or all accidents. It must be a combo of the 3.

[zolotiyeruki]

Right now he has trouble getting troops (cannon fodder to some).  I thought if he made an actual "war" proclamation that he would be free to draft any and all eligible individuals.  Russia has a population of 144 million.  Ukraine has a population of around 44 million.  Putin has made a phone call to his buddy in Belarus to get his army in gear.  Belarus has a population of 9.3 million. 

Population resources are 3.5 to 1.  He seems to have a huge backlog of military equipment left from the Soviet days.  Since old Soviet equipment has been refitted for NATO, it seems as though the Soviet backlog could be renewed for use in the Ukraine conflict.

From what I've seen, however, the vast majority of that reserve military equipment is scrap.  Sitting in warehouses and fields, rusting away while their defense contractors abscond with the maintenance funds. They've already thrown the best equipment they have into this fight, up to and including one-off prototype tanks.  There is documented evidence they've lost half of their tanks, and the reality is likely substantially higher. Their vaunted elite paratroopers, the VDV, have been shredded in every engagement.  The pride of their Black Sea fleet, the Moskva, was sunk, and even it was decades out-of-date.  They've already pulled a number of units from the eastern half of the country to backfill for their losses.  They have somewhere between 8k and 12k troops just trying to beat out the last of the resistance (1k Ukrainians?) in Mariupol.

Population resources don't mean a whole lot, either.  Ukraine has the edge in equipment, training, tactics, discipline, and morale.  Perhaps eight years ago their troops were on par with the Russians, but ever since 2014 they've been reforming and training with western government advice.  Russia can't just throw a bunch of minimally-trained, undisciplined, under-supplied troops into battle and expect to win, although I wouldn't be surprised if they try.  They're already suffering a massive brain drain--many of those with the resources to leave, are leaving.  And I've heard anecdotes of young men who are conveniently out of town when the recruiters come knocking.

At the moment, the front is pretty static, with only very marginal gains for either side.  And that's *after* Russia withdrew from the north and regrouped in the south and east, and before the heavier weapons and support (tanks, artillery, etc) started arriving from the West.  It'll be interesting to see what impact the new arms make.

[TomTX]

Kremlinology is alive and well: Putin to undergo cancer surgery, transfer power to ex-FSB chief: report

"according to a video from the mysterious Telegram channel “General SVR” on Saturday."

Fake news. Until one of the intelligence agencies, the Ukrainian government, or Russian news says something, it's a rumor. And if Russian news says it, its probably still false but at least you can extrapolate what the truth likely is based on the falsehood.

The more I learn about the Russian guys, the more I think they are a culture that retains mysterious mystic beliefs.  From the link:

Putin is said to bathe in the blood extracted from deer antlers, which are hacked off while they are growing and still full of fresh blood, the outlet said. The sickening “antler baths” are an alternative therapy in the Altai region of Russia, which borders Khazakstan and Mongolia.

After this war is said and done, Hollywood is going to have fun making a movie about this Putin guy.

That just sounds absurd. You would need a herd of 1,000 deer to get enough blood to bathe in. How could this have ever developed as a therapy if the only person rich enough to afford it is the president? This would literally cost tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars in labor alone just to get enough people cutting off deer antlers and capturing the blood to get the tens of gallons necessary to actually bathe in (less if it was just poured over someone).

Nah, with the corruption level in Russia you just need one pair of antlers to show off to the clients, the rest of the blood is straight from whatever the slaughterhouse processed recently.

[zolotiyeruki]

Kremlinology is alive and well: Putin to undergo cancer surgery, transfer power to ex-FSB chief: report

"according to a video from the mysterious Telegram channel “General SVR” on Saturday."

Fake news. Until one of the intelligence agencies, the Ukrainian government, or Russian news says something, it's a rumor. And if Russian news says it, its probably still false but at least you can extrapolate what the truth likely is based on the falsehood.

The more I learn about the Russian guys, the more I think they are a culture that retains mysterious mystic beliefs.  From the link:

Putin is said to bathe in the blood extracted from deer antlers, which are hacked off while they are growing and still full of fresh blood, the outlet said. The sickening “antler baths” are an alternative therapy in the Altai region of Russia, which borders Khazakstan and Mongolia.

After this war is said and done, Hollywood is going to have fun making a movie about this Putin guy.

That just sounds absurd. You would need a herd of 1,000 deer to get enough blood to bathe in. How could this have ever developed as a therapy if the only person rich enough to afford it is the president? This would literally cost tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars in labor alone just to get enough people cutting off deer antlers and capturing the blood to get the tens of gallons necessary to actually bathe in (less if it was just poured over someone).

Nah, with the corruption level in Russia you just need one pair of antlers to show off to the clients, the rest of the blood is straight from whatever the slaughterhouse processed recently.

Aha! THAT must be why it isn't working! :P

[pecunia]

Right now he has trouble getting troops (cannon fodder to some).  I thought if he made an actual "war" proclamation that he would be free to draft any and all eligible individuals.  Russia has a population of 144 million.  Ukraine has a population of around 44 million.  Putin has made a phone call to his buddy in Belarus to get his army in gear.  Belarus has a population of 9.3 million. 

Population resources are 3.5 to 1.  He seems to have a huge backlog of military equipment left from the Soviet days.  Since old Soviet equipment has been refitted for NATO, it seems as though the Soviet backlog could be renewed for use in the Ukraine conflict.

From what I've seen, however, the vast majority of that reserve military equipment is scrap.  Sitting in warehouses and fields, rusting away while their defense contractors abscond with the maintenance funds. They've already thrown the best equipment they have into this fight, up to and including one-off prototype tanks.  There is documented evidence they've lost half of their tanks, and the reality is likely substantially higher. Their vaunted elite paratroopers, the VDV, have been shredded in every engagement.  The pride of their Black Sea fleet, the Moskva, was sunk, and even it was decades out-of-date.  They've already pulled a number of units from the eastern half of the country to backfill for their losses.  They have somewhere between 8k and 12k troops just trying to beat out the last of the resistance (1k Ukrainians?) in Mariupol.

Population resources don't mean a whole lot, either.  Ukraine has the edge in equipment, training, tactics, discipline, and morale.  Perhaps eight years ago their troops were on par with the Russians, but ever since 2014 they've been reforming and training with western government advice.  Russia can't just throw a bunch of minimally-trained, undisciplined, under-supplied troops into battle and expect to win, although I wouldn't be surprised if they try.  They're already suffering a massive brain drain--many of those with the resources to leave, are leaving.  And I've heard anecdotes of young men who are conveniently out of town when the recruiters come knocking.

At the moment, the front is pretty static, with only very marginal gains for either side.  And that's *after* Russia withdrew from the north and regrouped in the south and east, and before the heavier weapons and support (tanks, artillery, etc) started arriving from the West.  It'll be interesting to see what impact the new arms make.

What about the rather strong possibility of Belarus entering the war?  Here's what Wiki says:

In 2017 the IISS estimated that personnel in the armed forces numbered 48,000. Most soldiers are conscripts serving for a period of 18 months, although there is an alternative service option.[6]

Belarus conducted military reforms in the early 2000s which reshaped its armed forces as a relatively effective force for a small state in somewhat difficult economic conditions.[7]

Unlike Russia, Belarus had some rather strong protests regarding dictator Lukashenko's reelection.  In fact, I think there are a lot of folks in that country that support Ukraine and if they sent the army away, the people may make trouble for the dictator.  Even he has been quoted as not wanting Belarus in this fight. 

[Travis]

Right now he has trouble getting troops (cannon fodder to some).  I thought if he made an actual "war" proclamation that he would be free to draft any and all eligible individuals.  Russia has a population of 144 million.  Ukraine has a population of around 44 million.  Putin has made a phone call to his buddy in Belarus to get his army in gear.  Belarus has a population of 9.3 million. 

Population resources are 3.5 to 1.  He seems to have a huge backlog of military equipment left from the Soviet days.  Since old Soviet equipment has been refitted for NATO, it seems as though the Soviet backlog could be renewed for use in the Ukraine conflict.

From what I've seen, however, the vast majority of that reserve military equipment is scrap.  Sitting in warehouses and fields, rusting away while their defense contractors abscond with the maintenance funds. They've already thrown the best equipment they have into this fight, up to and including one-off prototype tanks.  There is documented evidence they've lost half of their tanks, and the reality is likely substantially higher. Their vaunted elite paratroopers, the VDV, have been shredded in every engagement.  The pride of their Black Sea fleet, the Moskva, was sunk, and even it was decades out-of-date.  They've already pulled a number of units from the eastern half of the country to backfill for their losses.  They have somewhere between 8k and 12k troops just trying to beat out the last of the resistance (1k Ukrainians?) in Mariupol.

Population resources don't mean a whole lot, either.  Ukraine has the edge in equipment, training, tactics, discipline, and morale.  Perhaps eight years ago their troops were on par with the Russians, but ever since 2014 they've been reforming and training with western government advice.  Russia can't just throw a bunch of minimally-trained, undisciplined, under-supplied troops into battle and expect to win, although I wouldn't be surprised if they try.  They're already suffering a massive brain drain--many of those with the resources to leave, are leaving.  And I've heard anecdotes of young men who are conveniently out of town when the recruiters come knocking.

At the moment, the front is pretty static, with only very marginal gains for either side.  And that's *after* Russia withdrew from the north and regrouped in the south and east, and before the heavier weapons and support (tanks, artillery, etc) started arriving from the West.  It'll be interesting to see what impact the new arms make.

Raw manpower is a pointless statistic without comparing it to how quickly can that manpower be trained and equipped for war. Before the United States could put millions into the Army for WW2, it had to expand the number of training bases and staff 10x to accommodate the influx. That took months and was started before Pearl Harbor. Even the millions of former conscripts and retired soldiers will need weeks of retraining before they're of any use. Most will be out of shape, in poor health, and working jobs that will still be necessary to the Russian economy. Can they replaced? Sure, but not quickly.  Russians best option if it wants to make the war formal would be to send the existing conscripts into the fight. They are the best trained and equipped reserves available, for varying definitions of trained and equipped. Once they're committed and start dying, that's it. That's the next generation of potential career soldiers that won't be around to rebuild the Russian army when this is over.

[LennStar]

Russia couldn't manage a war on two fronts just in Ukraine.  Opening up a second front against an even better-prepared foe would be...ill-advised.  Of course, given the past couple of months, "ill-advised" doesn't mean it won't happen.
[/quote]
That said Finnland's military is all about "holding them back long enough to get massive help from other countries" (because they are even more outnumbered than the Ukrainians, who were not only very brave but also extremely lucky at the beginning). They have neither equipment nor plans for an attack. But they will have a damn effective defense. Even if Russia fully mobilizes, I doubt they could win in both countries at the same time.

What about the rather strong possibility of Belarus entering the war?

Nah. The military heads refused to do that once already in fear of losing control. The Belarus leader is not going to risk a military revolt on top of the half-revolt the civilians are making (like sabotaging of train infrastructure). I mean there is an actual active-military belarussian troop fighting on the Ukrainian side. They just decided they need a long break from their service and are defending Belarussian democracy on Ukrainian soil (their words).

[pecunia]

Russia couldn't manage a war on two fronts just in Ukraine.  Opening up a second front against an even better-prepared foe would be...ill-advised.  Of course, given the past couple of months, "ill-advised" doesn't mean it won't happen.

That said Finnland's military is all about "holding them back long enough to get massive help from other countries" (because they are even more outnumbered than the Ukrainians, who were not only very brave but also extremely lucky at the beginning). They have neither equipment nor plans for an attack. But they will have a damn effective defense. Even if Russia fully mobilizes, I doubt they could win in both countries at the same time.

What about the rather strong possibility of Belarus entering the war?

Nah. The military heads refused to do that once already in fear of losing control. The Belarus leader is not going to risk a military revolt on top of the half-revolt the civilians are making (like sabotaging of train infrastructure). I mean there is an actual active-military belarussian troop fighting on the Ukrainian side. They just decided they need a long break from their service and are defending Belarussian democracy on Ukrainian soil (their words).
[/quote]

I like that assessment of what Belarus will do.  I'm sure Putin has been putting the pressure on the Belarus dictator.  So, what other country does Putin have on his side?

Now, if I was Putin, I think I'd look around and say, "The whole world is not with me on this one.  Am I doing something wrong?" 

So, the assessment from previous comments is that he will not be able to make substantial additions to the troops he now has.  Most of the world is committed to helping the Ukrainians stop this war.  Modern weapons supplied to Ukraine will help.  Sooner or later, those sanctions will do something. 

The Russians need to be ground down.

Hopefully after the war, international bankers will not keep the country poor.

And the Snake Island stampi0s sort of cool.

https://www.npr.org/2022/04/20/1093764504/ukraine-snake-island-postage-stamp

[LennStar]

So, the assessment from previous comments is that he will not be able to make substantial additions to the troops he now has.

IF he does not mobilize. There are signs he is preparing for it. But it still holds true that those reserves will be very much ill equipped and with extremely low moral.

[zolotiyeruki]

I like that assessment of what Belarus will do.  I'm sure Putin has been putting the pressure on the Belarus dictator.  So, what other country does Putin have on his side?

Now, if I was Putin, I think I'd look around and say, "The whole world is not with me on this one.  Am I doing something wrong?" 

So, the assessment from previous comments is that he will not be able to make substantial additions to the troops he now has.  Most of the world is committed to helping the Ukrainians stop this war.  Modern weapons supplied to Ukraine will help.  Sooner or later, those sanctions will do something. 

...

And the Snake Island stampi0s sort of cool.

What countries are on Putin's side?  Broadly speaking, it's a regular "Who's who" of the world's worst dictators, plus countries who depend on Russia for oil, weapons, or both.

Putin may well be able to mobile a lot of troops.  The consensus I've seen is that they'll be worthless in battle.  In the long term, Russia is hosed, and Ukraine will take hundreds of billions, or trillions, to rebuild.  In the short term, it's a matter of how much additional destruction Russia can wreak.  In the medium term, it's a question of how much Ukrainian land Russia can hold, and for how long.

I think that's why Putin wants to hold a referendum--if he can claim that Luhansk/Donbas have voted to join Russia, then Ukrainian attacks on Russian forces there can be used as justification for wider mobilization.

I want to buy one of those stamps...

[MustacheAndaHalf]

So, what other country does Putin have on his side?

What countries are on Putin's side?  Broadly speaking, it's a regular "Who's who" of the world's worst dictators, plus countries who depend on Russia for oil, weapons, or both.

The most populous countries on earth: China & India.  While China doesn't want to upset trading partners (EU, US), they refuse to join sanctions on Russia.  India seems to be closer to Russia than I expected, with almost a rebellious attitude at pressure from the West.  And these two are strange bedfellows, with India & China having no love lost over their border skirmishes.

Now, if I was Putin, I think I'd look around and say, "The whole world is not with me on this one.  Am I doing something wrong?" 

From listening to experts on Putin, I don't think he introspects like this.  Putin is less likely to do soul searching, and more likely to impose laws imprisoning people 3-15 years if they criticize the war.  The journalist who flashed a sign on Russian TV explaining what was going on got 3 years in prison, I think (I didn't follow the trial itself).

Putin created this whole WWII theme around Russia's invasion of Ukraine.  Most of Russia simply accepts it - and some would be too scared to admit otherwise.  Like the Russian living in Ukraine trying to explain she might be killed by Russian bombing - and her mother contradicted her, saying no that was Ukraine bombing itself, etc.  Russians won't believe their own children even if they might die.  I'd say that's a pretty severe form of brainwashing, and leaves Putin unconcerned about what people think.

[Tyson]

So, what other country does Putin have on his side?

What countries are on Putin's side?  Broadly speaking, it's a regular "Who's who" of the world's worst dictators, plus countries who depend on Russia for oil, weapons, or both.

The most populous countries on earth: China & India.  While China doesn't want to upset trading partners (EU, US), they refuse to join sanctions on Russia.  India seems to be closer to Russia than I expected, with almost a rebellious attitude at pressure from the West.  And these two are strange bedfellows, with India & China having no love lost over their border skirmishes.

Now, if I was Putin, I think I'd look around and say, "The whole world is not with me on this one.  Am I doing something wrong?" 

From listening to experts on Putin, I don't think he introspects like this.  Putin is less likely to do soul searching, and more likely to impose laws imprisoning people 3-15 years if they criticize the war.  The journalist who flashed a sign on Russian TV explaining what was going on got 3 years in prison, I think (I didn't follow the trial itself).

Putin created this whole WWII theme around Russia's invasion of Ukraine.  Most of Russia simply accepts it - and some would be too scared to admit otherwise.  Like the Russian living in Ukraine trying to explain she might be killed by Russian bombing - and her mother contradicted her, saying no that was Ukraine bombing itself, etc.  Russians won't believe their own children even if they might die.  I'd say that's a pretty severe form of brainwashing, and leaves Putin unconcerned about what people think.

People keep saying "this is Putin's war, not the Russian people's war".  I disagree.  The Russian people are closing their eyes and refusing to see what is actually happening.  That is not a morally neutral action.

[maizefolk]

So, what other country does Putin have on his side?

What countries are on Putin's side?  Broadly speaking, it's a regular "Who's who" of the world's worst dictators, plus countries who depend on Russia for oil, weapons, or both.

The most populous countries on earth: China & India.  While China doesn't want to upset trading partners (EU, US), they refuse to join sanctions on Russia.  India seems to be closer to Russia than I expected, with almost a rebellious attitude at pressure from the West.  And these two are strange bedfellows, with India & China having no love lost over their border skirmishes.

I think the dependence on Russia for weapons is only a small part of the puzzle when it comes to understanding India's position.

India and Russia have a history going back decades. I work with a couple of folks from there and one night over beers did the obnoxiously cliche american thing and asked one of them about why India was so supportive of Russia. He brought up the 1971 war (that I never even learned about in school) and spoke glowingly about how Russia was the only country that would come in India's aid when the whole world was against them. Armed with that I've been able to talk to a few other people with more finesse than "hey, explain your original home country to me" and a substantial majority of individual people who grew up in India speak very positively of Russia.

[pecunia]

So, what other country does Putin have on his side?

What countries are on Putin's side?  Broadly speaking, it's a regular "Who's who" of the world's worst dictators, plus countries who depend on Russia for oil, weapons, or both.

The most populous countries on earth: China & India.  While China doesn't want to upset trading partners (EU, US), they refuse to join sanctions on Russia.  India seems to be closer to Russia than I expected, with almost a rebellious attitude at pressure from the West.  And these two are strange bedfellows, with India & China having no love lost over their border skirmishes.

I think the dependence on Russia for weapons is only a small part of the puzzle when it comes to understanding India's position.

India and Russia have a history going back decades. I work with a couple of folks from there and one night over beers did the obnoxiously cliche american thing and asked one of them about why India was so supportive of Russia. He brought up the 1971 war (that I never even learned about in school) and spoke glowingly about how Russia was the only country that would come in India's aid when the whole world was against them. Armed with that I've been able to talk to a few other people with more finesse than "hey, explain your original home country to me" and a substantial majority of individual people who grew up in India speak very positively of Russia.

It could be that both India and China will smile at Russia from the sidelines during this war and not engage.  India is beginning to build it's own weapons.  They have sold their BrahMos cruise missiles to neighboring countries.  There is a lot of Western investment pouring into India.  I doubt whether they want to sour a bright future on supporting an old friend who has strayed from the right path.

I sometimes wrongly like to think I have been aware of world events.  The 1971 war was the war when Bangladesh separated themselves from Pakistan.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indo-Pakistani_War_of_1971

Rock'n'Roll history:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Concert_for_Bangladesh

Perhaps both countries will continue to buy Russian oil at a discount from the world oil price.

[Abe]

The Indian armed forces were heavily dependent on Soviet technology until the late 1990s. It was only then that the US began moving away from supplying Pakistan exclusively (though India was more ideologically aligned with representative democracy and Pakistan had recurrent issues with military dictators, India was thought to be more socialist and thus aligned with the USSR). This changed as Pakistan intelligence began supporting non-US aligned militant Islamists. Not that the US had an issue with Islamic extremists per se, but as long as they aligned with the US goals of destabilizing the USSR influence in the region (I.e. in Afghanistan). When Pakistan intelligence began supporting Al Qaeda / Taliban associated groups, the US became less interested in Pakistan. India has not really forgiven the US for supporting Pakistan and essentially is pursuing a self-interest foreign policy without any strong defensive alliances with either side. They have no reason to expect reciprocity from the US ok event of another Pakistan attack.

So basically now India is saying that Russia’s fiascos don’t affect India generally, there’s a low risk of the conflict expanding to India, and there’s no reason to think the US will support India with oil exports in exchange for helping out (we can barely support Europe’s needs). Thus the lack of interest in crippling their economy for an unrelated matter. This rationale also applies to China, and really any country not bordering Ukraine. I think in the long term this is short-sighted, but can understand the reluctance to assist when resources are limited, and there is no clear end to the conflict.

Regarding the wars - India is irritated that the US kept selling weapons to Pakistan despite multiple attacks by Pakistan over several years. Granted; there was plenty of money to be made by both the US and USSR supplying weapons to the two sides. Also it can be argued that India got involved in a Pakistani civil war in 1971, though who started what is always unclear in these conflicts. India will argue it was a humanitarian crisis in east Pakistan (Bangladesh) that spurred their involvement, but it was also a “kick them when they are down” strategy too. Regardless no one was excited about getting involved, for obvious reasons.

[Just Joe]

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/05/05/us/politics/moskva-russia-ship-ukraine-us.html

Not certain why this is being publicized. Seems like it could lead to American Navy ships being targeted...

[PeteD01]

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/05/05/us/politics/moskva-russia-ship-ukraine-us.html

Not certain why this is being publicized. Seems like it could lead to American Navy ships being targeted...

Testing Russia's resolve to escalate at a time of deepening involvement in Ukrainian operations that moght be transitioning into a broader counteroffensive.

[maizefolk]

Or accepting a non-optimal foreign relations choice (my guess is Russia already knew we were sharing intel with Ukraine, but talking about it publicly probably makes it harder to swallow) because of domestic pressure. The Biden administration is getting much more flack domestically from people who are upset at then for not doing more in Ukraine than for doing too much, so talking publicly about more of what they are already doing may be an attempt to relieve some of that pressure.

[zolotiyeruki]

I was under the impression that intel sharing with Ukraine has already been known for several weeks.  For higher-ups in the US to openly state it, however, is significant.

But what is Russia gonna do about it? Cyberattacks?  Nukes?  That's about all they've got left.  Certainly the cyberattacks are worth worrying about, but those have also been going on for quite some time.

[Travis]

I was under the impression that intel sharing with Ukraine has already been known for several weeks.  For higher-ups in the US to openly state it, however, is significant.

But what is Russia gonna do about it? Cyberattacks?  Nukes?  That's about all they've got left.  Certainly the cyberattacks are worth worrying about, but those have also been going on for quite some time.

Russia would have to be complete morons to think we weren't giving them intel. We have dozens of aircraft watching the war 24/7.  Saying it out loud is the weird part. Russia can't do anything overt about it to us.

[pecunia]

I was under the impression that intel sharing with Ukraine has already been known for several weeks.  For higher-ups in the US to openly state it, however, is significant.

But what is Russia gonna do about it? Cyberattacks?  Nukes?  That's about all they've got left.  Certainly the cyberattacks are worth worrying about, but those have also been going on for quite some time.

Russia would have to be complete morons to think we weren't giving them intel. We have dozens of aircraft watching the war 24/7.  Saying it out loud is the weird part. Russia can't do anything overt about it to us.

Is this now considered a war of attrition?  It seems like the battle lines don't have much movement.  It seems every day the Ukrainians chip away at maybe 200 men, 5 or 6 tanks, etc.  Russia seems to be fighting for crazy ideas.  Will they eventually decide to cut their losses and just go home?

[Travis]

I was under the impression that intel sharing with Ukraine has already been known for several weeks.  For higher-ups in the US to openly state it, however, is significant.

But what is Russia gonna do about it? Cyberattacks?  Nukes?  That's about all they've got left.  Certainly the cyberattacks are worth worrying about, but those have also been going on for quite some time.

Russia would have to be complete morons to think we weren't giving them intel. We have dozens of aircraft watching the war 24/7.  Saying it out loud is the weird part. Russia can't do anything overt about it to us.

Is this now considered a war of attrition?  It seems like the battle lines don't have much movement.  It seems every day the Ukrainians chip away at maybe 200 men, 5 or 6 tanks, etc.  Russia seems to be fighting for crazy ideas.  Will they eventually decide to cut their losses and just go home?

Russia has been throwing tanks and artillery against the eastern lines for 3 weeks now and gained 20 miles from Izyum. The main line facing Donetsk has moved single digit miles.  It's cost them close to 5k dead or wounded and a few hundred vehicles. Ukraine doesn't really advertise its losses, but they are considerably fewer than Russia's. Ukrainian forces are also driving Russian troops from Kharkiv back towards the border.  Ukraine doesn't have the armor or mobility to encircle Russian troop concentrations, but they're taking territory.  Russian strategy won't really change until Ukrainian forces retake Kherson and they start losing ground in Donbas. I think Putin is still hoping he can negotiate himself into holding post-2014 territory.

It is a war of attrition for the most part, but right now Ukraine has the advantage being mostly on the defensive with very precise weaponry.

[PeteD01]

Looks like the Ukrainian counteroffensive is well under way:

https://twitter.com/Nrg8000/status/1522871820487372800

[LennStar]

Looks like the Ukrainian counteroffensive is well under way:

https://twitter.com/Nrg8000/status/1522871820487372800

Ooh, looks nice.
I guess by now most of the Ukrainian reservist are in the fight, giving Ukraine a numerical advantage now that Kyiv front is closed.
That is also the reason I think for the sudden Belarus's "manouvers". Since Belarus does not dare to force it's troops to attack, they should at least be a thread high enough that it pins down a sizable amount of Ukrainian troops.

Imho all comes down to if Putin dares to declare mobilization on the 9th. If not he will lose to time and support of Ukraine from The West.

[Radagast]

I am still continuously impressed by how bad the Russians are. Several times a week I find myself wondering if they are trying to lose the war on purpose. Like when Lavrov said Jews were Nazis and Hitler was a Jew. And Putin had to apologize to the Israeli PM after they started to transfer non-lethal arms and before they could start getting to the sophisticated and deadly stuff. Like, really? Plus several extremely dumb tactical and strategic decisions a day, like getting repeatedly blasted on Snake Island, or suggesting a "military socialist" economy is the right ticket. It really seems like they are trying to both lose the war and drag their economy and society into the Russian 1950's for perpetuity.

[pecunia]

I am still continuously impressed by how bad the Russians are. Several times a week I find myself wondering if they are trying to lose the war on purpose. Like when Lavrov said Jews were Nazis and Hitler was a Jew. And Putin had to apologize to the Israeli PM after they started to transfer non-lethal arms and before they could start getting to the sophisticated and deadly stuff. Like, really? Plus several extremely dumb tactical and strategic decisions a day, like getting repeatedly blasted on Snake Island, or suggesting a "military socialist" economy is the right ticket. It really seems like they are trying to both lose the war and drag their economy and society into the Russian 1950's for perpetuity.

How can they obtain allies or even be sold war materials when they kill innocent women and children?  No Society condones that sort of behavior.  Those photos of them blowing up that baby hospital and killing pregnant women didn't help them.  Then, they don't have a real cause.   The Nazi thing sure seems like a fairy tale.  The trumped up tales of Russians being persecuted in breakaway provinces smells like rotten fish too. 

If Russia was an individual person, it would be locked up to be observed for a while due to abhorrent behavior.

[MustacheAndaHalf]

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/05/05/us/politics/moskva-russia-ship-ukraine-us.html

Not certain why this is being publicized. Seems like it could lead to American Navy ships being targeted...

Russia deliberately attacking a U.S. Navy ship is an act of war.  That also triggers NATO article 5, that an attack on one is an attack on all.  The U.S. and Europe could decide to declare war on Russia over such an attack - and the firepower the U.S. brings on Russia would be far worse than one Navy ship feeding intel to Ukraine.

If this Navy intelligence ship is a hostage and Russia a gunman, then I'd say the U.S. would be Dirty Harry aiming at the gunman's head and saying "Go ahead, make my day."  Not with a smile, but with grim determination.  The U.S. already views Ukraine as a means to defend democrancy and weaken Russia.  If Russia wants to declare war on NATO, that would make permanently weakening Russia a certainty.

[Jack0Life]

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/05/05/us/politics/moskva-russia-ship-ukraine-us.html

Not certain why this is being publicized. Seems like it could lead to American Navy ships being targeted...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BljFluglIPg
Watching the video, it seems more obvious that the US has been helping the Ukraine with intelligences.
At first I wonder why the NY times would published such news but as the video continue to explain, maybe the US is leaking the info out on purpose just to deter the Soviet just a bit. It's like "hey Ukraine has our help, you're not going to win this war. You need to quit now".

[Abe]

Russia has retreated from Kharkiv, that’s a good sign. It appears the heavy weapons NATO is sending has beaten back Russian forces in several areas, but they just keep coming in other areas. It’s a bloody fight of wack-a-mole. Russian strategy remains completely poorly thought out, as per usual.

[Sibley]

Yes, Ukraine is doing quite well in the north. But their progress in pushing Russia back further south isn't as good. I know there's a ton of stuff being sent to Ukraine, not sure if it's in active use yet. Hopefully they'll be able to make more progress in the south.

https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-may-7

[Travis]

The talking heads in Russian media probably realized they all overstepped the Nazi narrative vis a vis Israel, and are now qualifying "Nazi doesn't mean anti-Jew" but rather "Nazi means whatever we need it to mean."

[Travis]

https://twitter.com/JuliaDavisNews/status/1523036461595242498

https://twitter.com/JuliaDavisNews/status/1522993211513663489

Russian state media expressing concern that mobilization wouldn't be logistically supportable.  180 degree change from a week ago where they were advocating national call to arms against all of Europe.

[pecunia]

Yes, Ukraine is doing quite well in the north. But their progress in pushing Russia back further south isn't as good. I know there's a ton of stuff being sent to Ukraine, not sure if it's in active use yet. Hopefully they'll be able to make more progress in the south.

https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-may-7

They need to blow that bridge up to Russian mainland and stop stuff from coming up through Crimea.

[LennStar]

They would simply ship it. Of course that is a lot harder/expensive.

The talking heads in Russian media probably realized they all overstepped the Nazi narrative vis a vis Israel, and are now qualifying "Nazi doesn't mean anti-Jew" but rather "Nazi means whatever we need it to mean."

My feelings are very much conflicted in the face of the the unusual thruthness.

[pecunia]

They would simply ship it. Of course that is a lot harder/expensive.

- SNIP -

My feelings are very much conflicted in the face of the the unusual thruthness.

That bridge to Crimea sure does look like a weak link in the Russian military.

If you look at a map, you will see the territory the Russians have.  It's like a belt of land along the border.  Part of that belt crosses the sea of Azov.  The Russian holding is rather narrow.  If that belt of Russian occupied land was broken there, they would largely only be able to resupply their forces on Crimea either by the new bridge to Crimea or by sea. 

Could it be broken?  Look at the tough time the Russians have had with the soldiers in Mariupol.

It just seems like with the new weapons being supplied, attempts to resupply by water could be thwarted from the air.

That bridge is new.  It would also demoralize the Russians.

Just another thought on your computer screen.  Not even worth a cup of coffee.

[TomTX]

Yes, Ukraine is doing quite well in the north. But their progress in pushing Russia back further south isn't as good. I know there's a ton of stuff being sent to Ukraine, not sure if it's in active use yet. Hopefully they'll be able to make more progress in the south.

https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-may-7

Retaking a chunk of the North means cutting of a major supply route which has been supporting the Russian forces in the East. Supplies and logistics are already a significant weak point for Russia. Cutting this supply line will be a major blow to the capacity of Russian forces - which are frequently already low on equipment, fuel and food. Tank or APC doesn't do much good when it runs out of gas and ammo. Soldiers' morale and ability to fight significantly degrades without food.

[Sibley]

Good surprises!

Canada's PM Trudeau went to Ukraine, specifically Irpin.
https://twitter.com/KyivIndependent/status/1523307225485352965

Jill Biden went to Ukraine, she met with Zelensky's wife today. Who at least for today was in Uzhhorod in Western Ukraine. First time since the war started that her location was publicly known.
https://twitter.com/KyivIndependent/status/1523302746207698945

[LennStar]

Incredible video about the attack from the Autrian military. Unfortunately German only, but maybe someone makes subtitles.
If I am not wrong it shows what we had earlier in this thread about the town with artillery on bith sides. Also pictures and numbers I have not seen before and historical comparison. Even if you don't understand the language, you should watch the pictures.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QJiuc4KWmQo

[Travis]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wSxdfu3WPSc

Moscow Victory Parade. Putin's speech starts at 24:19.


TL;DW

-This conflict is an extension of WW2
-It's all NATO's fault for teaching Ukraine how to defend themselves
-They wanted to put nukes (not bioweapons) in Ukraine
-Donbas is Russia
-I care about wounded soldiers. I signed a law saying so.


Also, the parade was 75% of the size of previous years incorporating some older equipment because the better stuff is at the front. Original plan was to have SU-27s fly in a "Z" shape, but they're all at the front so older MiG-29s were swapped in. Flyover was also to include bombers. All were cancelled due to "weather." Its partly cloudy in Moscow today. Maintenance problems are suspected.

[zolotiyeruki]

Also, the parade was 75% of the size of previous years incorporating some older equipment because the better stuff is at the front. Original plan was to have SU-27s fly in a "Z" shape, but they're all at the front so older MiG-29s were swapped in. Flyover was also to include bombers. All were cancelled due to "weather." Its partly cloudy in Moscow today. Maintenance problems are suspected.

I saw a post somewhere that said that *all* victory day flyovers in the entire country were cancelled due to "weather".

I have to wonder if they're worried about Stingers infiltrating the country.  Heaven knows they've had plenty of "accidents" at various military-related facilities over the past few weeks.

[Just Joe]

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/05/05/us/politics/moskva-russia-ship-ukraine-us.html

Not certain why this is being publicized. Seems like it could lead to American Navy ships being targeted...

Russia deliberately attacking a U.S. Navy ship is an act of war. 

I don't disagree with you but doesn't that play both ways? If the Pentagon helped sink a Russian ship even if the USA didn't pull the trigger directly - couldn't the Russians argue this was an act of war?

Or - am I missing something like they won't complain too loudly b/c they are unable to really do anything about it?