Russia v Ukraine

[FairmontGS]

Originally Posted by GasoLane

They need Kamaz designers and techs, because you can't kill those things.

Yes, the Kamaz is a good thing. Done a few Dakar Rallies and some wins?

[MITCHAY]

Another 20 Bushmasters and 14 M113 APCs from Australia gifted.

Originally Posted by T3rminator

Strong words from the Turkish president on the new NATO applicants. If he doesn't change his tune, he may suddenly disappear from parliament through a mysterious vote of no confidence, or by some other means.

https://www.aei.org/foreign-and-defe...mands-to-nato/

List of demands:

Old mate will definitely leverage this for all it's worth but I find it hard to believe all those will be met if any. It will be interesting to see what happens.

[T3rminator]

Originally Posted by MITCHAY

Old mate will definitely leverage this for all it's worth but I find it hard to believe all those will be met if any. It will be interesting to see what happens.

If they do indeed get blocked, might give Macron the impetus to kick off his EU Army dream.

[MITCHAY]

Originally Posted by T3rminator

If they do indeed get blocked, might give Macron the impetus to kick off his EU Army dream.

Lol Macron is full of **** on this EU army. Do it already but that would mean potential members actually have to front up and pay

I think it's more likely that the bigger NATO partners will make separate obligations outside of NATO if it is blocked.

The bloke is a **** but I understand Erdoğan's position to some extent. If you are obligated to defend a potential NATO member then you want to make sure that your interests are considered.

[T3rminator]

Originally Posted by MITCHAY

Lol Macron is full of **** on this EU army. Do it already but that would mean potential members actually have to front up and pay

I think it's more likely that the bigger NATO partners will make separate obligations outside of NATO if it is blocked.

Haha, I actually don't mind the idea. An EU military run by the EU to protect EU's interests. Its a strange situation that some members of the EU are not part of the alliance. NATO is run by some bloke on another continent to protect Europe's interests , but I guess that bloke does happen to have all the advanced weapons.

And yep, UK has already done their own pact with Sweden and Finland. They probably saw it from a mile away.

[MITCHAY]

Originally Posted by T3rminator

Haha, I actually don't mind the idea. An EU military run by the EU to protect EU's interests. Its a strange situation that some members of the EU are not part of the alliance. NATO is run by some bloke on another continent to protect Europe's interests , but I guess that bloke does happen to have all the advanced weapons.

I'm sure the US would like the EU and NATO to pick up the tab. They aren't the same blocs by definition but both have a lot of the same members. Ukraine want to be in both.

Yes already aware of the UK deal. It will be interesting to see if Russia tests this because at this point I reckon the UK would **** whip Russia on it's own.

While we are aware they have not unleashed the full Russian forces and that will be bad, it means Putin has to at some point admit it's not a "special operation" and somehow spin it to mobilise the full force to declare war

[T3rminator]

A trivial matter in the overall scheme of things, but interesting to see the ATP pull that trigger.

Wimbledon stripped of ranking points by ATP and WTA for banning Russian and Belarusian athletes
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-05-...-ban/101086950

[zilo]

Originally Posted by Cav

So anyway, who's winning?

Putin is kicking Ukraine backside.

[T3rminator]

Hmmmmmm Col Richard Black, another ex senior military officer, with some alternate views. Ukraine Russia discussion starts second half. Reckons there were some 50 french officers who were part of the 2000+ that surrendered at the steel plant, and speculates it was the french who downed the Moskva. Makes a comparison of the "shock and awe" operation to the "special operation", and has some alternate views on whats happening in the media and what happened in Bucha.

His comments on russian subs lines up with what mate with links to the navy told me very early on, that they suspect there are already subs off the coast of the US ready for a nuclear strike if they get too involved.

And no, haven't done a background check to assess his credibility.

[PhilT2]

Originally Posted by T3rminator

His comments on russian subs lines up with what mate with links to the navy told me very early on, that they suspect there are already subs off the coast of the US ready for a nuclear strike if they get too involved.

No need to "suspect" that there are Russian subs off the US coast, that's been public knowledge for years. Same as there is US subs off the Russian coast. All part of the MAD (mutually assured destruction) plan that lets each country know that even if they can totally destroy the other they themselves will be destroyed

No need to assess his credibility, his story lives or dies on the strength of the evidence he has to prove any of it. Some of it is contradicted by what the Russians themselves say, like destroying Ukrainian infrastructure. He claims the Russians could have destroyed the power supply and other infrastructure but didn't. Maybe the Russians felt that bombing a nuclear reactor might not be a good idea if you want to occupy a country later. The other things like bridges, railways, oil refineries etc the Russians claim to have destroyed already.

His claim that the Syrians were happy and well fed until the CIA started a rebellion doesn't stand up either. The long drought and the countries economic problems at that time are well documented. Not saying that the US is innocent but lots of arab nations had issues around that time.

Black's claim that the Russians avoided destroying cities is contradicted by what they did in Chechnya. The capital Grozny was levelled. Rebel groups rarely have the munitions to level a whole city.

I don't object to anyone having a different point of view but if he wants to make extraordinary claims then he needs to produce some evidence for at least some of it.

[T3rminator]

Strange. All these ex senior military officers seem to be making things up.

[PhilT2]

Originally Posted by T3rminator

Strange. All these ex senior military officers seem to be making things up.

The problem as I see it is all these generals are sitting on their tails in the US. And they all have different points of view so some of them have to be wrong don't they? When the experts disagree what do we do?
I just wish one of them could tell us when it will end.

[Citroënbender]

Mick Ryan - albeit not a US general, nor even a Kentucky Colonel - has been appraising the situation in the ABC (Oz) news website as it progresses, offering a variety of scenarios and possibilities.

In 2002 I remember an American brass swearing that Bin Laden was (in his words) “worm bait by now”. That opinion could only have trickled down, and was quite wrong.

[Fordman1]

Originally Posted by PhilT2

No need to "suspect" that there are Russian subs off the US coast, that's been public knowledge for years. Same as there is US subs off the Russian coast. All part of the MAD (mutually assured destruction) plan that lets each country know that even if they can totally destroy the other they themselves will be destroyed

No need to assess his credibility, his story lives or dies on the strength of the evidence he has to prove any of it. Some of it is contradicted by what the Russians themselves say, like destroying Ukrainian infrastructure. He claims the Russians could have destroyed the power supply and other infrastructure but didn't. Maybe the Russians felt that bombing a nuclear reactor might not be a good idea if you want to occupy a country later. The other things like bridges, railways, oil refineries etc the Russians claim to have destroyed already.

His claim that the Syrians were happy and well fed until the CIA started a rebellion doesn't stand up either. The long drought and the countries economic problems at that time are well documented. Not saying that the US is innocent but lots of arab nations had issues around that time.

Black's claim that the Russians avoided destroying cities is contradicted by what they did in Chechnya. The capital Grozny was levelled. Rebel groups rarely have the munitions to level a whole city.

I don't object to anyone having a different point of view but if he wants to make extraordinary claims then he needs to produce some evidence for at least some of it.

There are few things that need to be clarified:

1. Yes, there are noisy Russian SSBN Submarines in the Oceans. Maybe even the rubbish “Kursk” ? ( Has Russia admitted to it being sunk yet ? )

2. The UK and the US have a technological advantage with SSBN’s and they are ready, where they need to be.

3. Those “old” Russian (Soviet designed) ill maintained SSBN’s have some silent, deadly SSN Submarines (from the UK and US - “Hunter Killers”) trailing them ready to send them to the ocean depths ( if the Russians, through incompetence, don’t blow up themselves first).

[xkxlxm]

PhilT2: "His claim that the Syrians were happy and well fed until the CIA started a rebellion doesn't stand up either. The long drought and the countries economic problems at that time are well documented. Not saying that the US is innocent but lots of arab nations had issues around that time."

Some of you might remember that after 9/11 the neocons in the US came up with the 'Axis of Evil' (one of them must have overdosed on comics): Iraq, Iran and North Korea.

What they really wanted to say was that Iraq, Iran and Syria constituted the so-called Axis.

But that would have given the game away. It would have been too obvious that all they were concerned about was the Middle East; specifically, states that were not stooges for Israel and the US.

So they left Syria out and included North Korea. North Korea was included to make it look like we, the West, were facing a global threat - and we had to do something about it ... like starting off with an invasion of ... Iraq ... in the Middle East.

North Korea was never going to be invaded. Not a chance. It was simply a decoy to distract us from the main game.

The Israelis would love to see the US attack the next country on the list, Iran, but even Shrub (baby Bush) wasn't stupid enough to do that.

Syria was, however, up for regime change. Obama didn't quite seem to have the desire to complete the job and with Iranian, Russian and Hezbollah support Syria managed to survive, albeit not entirely intact.

I wonder if they will have another go at Syria now that Russia has been weakened in Ukraine.

[Mulva]

Wonder if this is real - Russia's Counsellor to the UN supposedly resigned over Putin's invasion

https://twitter.com/HillelNeuer/stat...5Es1_&ref_url=

[PhilT2]

Originally Posted by Mulva

Wonder if this is real - Russia's Counsellor to the UN supposedly resigned over Putin's invasion

Seems to be real. Putin is probably mixing up a batch of Novichok for him right now.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-04-...mies/100984912

[zilo]

Originally Posted by Mulva

Wonder if this is real - Russia's Counsellor to the UN supposedly resigned over Putin's invasion

https://twitter.com/HillelNeuer/stat...5Es1_&ref_url=

image

It's fake.

[GasoLane]

Originally Posted by zilo

It's fake.

Hmm, the BBC, Aljazeera and Washington post don't think so.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-61555390
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/...war-in-ukraine
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world...s-ukraine-war/

[zilo]

Originally Posted by GasoLane

Hmm, the BBC, Aljazeera and Washington post don't think so.

Sure ..it's a news item.

Doesn't mean they agree with it's contents.

Can't see any editorial opinion attached.

Sounds to me like a Russian trying to get political asylum.

[JasonACT]

Ah, so it's true, but fake nonetheless. Got it.

[MDS69]

A bit of a laugh, borrowed from another forum.


Ukraine

A Russian wife turned to her husband and asked, "What's this special military operation our glorious leader keeps talking about?"


Her husband replied, "It's a proxy war between Russia and NATO."


"Oh, right. How's it going?"


"Well," he replied, "so far we've lost 24,000 soldiers, 2,000 tanks, 200 aircraft, numerous helicopters, and loads of armoured vehicles and artillery pieces, and our flagship along with other naval pieces"


"Wow! What about NATO?"


"They haven't turned up yet."

[burnz]

Ukraine admits major defeat

Russian troops have taken over the town of Liman in the northern Donetsk region, the government in Kiev revealed, on Thursday evening. Ukrainian forces have reportedly withdrawn west-southwest towards Slavyansk.

“We have lost the town of Liman,” Alexey Arestovich, a key adviser to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, admitted in a livestream on Thursday.

Though Arestovich cited “unconfirmed reports,” Russian military correspondent Alexander Kots posted a video of Russian troops in the city shortly thereafter, captioned “Liman is ours.” Ukrainian troops “fled” west and southwest, Kots added, while covering their retreat with artillery fire.

The storming of Liman lasted less than a week, with Russian forces entering the city on May 23. There were unconfirmed reports, on Telegram channels, that as many as 500 Ukrainian troops had surrendered. By Wednesday, three quarters of Liman was allegedly under Russian control, with the remaining Ukrainian troops said to be fortifying the industrial zone on the southwestern edge of town.

However, an unverified video posted on TikTok on Wednesday purported to show a group of Ukrainian soldiers clinging to an armored vehicle driving at high speed away from the town, amid an artillery bombardment.

‘Go f**k yourselves’, Zelensky aide tells Western officials ‘Go f**k yourselves’, Zelensky aide tells Western officials
Liman was among the first towns in the Donetsk region to be taken over by militia opposed to the government in Kiev after the 2014 Maidan coup. Ukrainian “anti-terrorist” forces captured it in early June that year, and used their positions to lay siege to Slavyansk, where the separatist militia held on for another month.

News of the Ukrainian defeat at Liman comes amid the ongoing advance of Russian forces from Popasnaya, which threatens to completely cut off thousands of troops loyal to Kiev in the Severodonetsk-Lisichansk pocket.

Russia attacked the neighboring state in late February, following Ukraine’s failure to implement the terms of the Minsk agreements, first signed in 2014, and Moscow’s eventual recognition of the Donbass republics of Donetsk and Lugansk. The German- and French-brokered protocols were designed to give the breakaway regions special status within the Ukrainian state.

The Kremlin has since demanded that Ukraine officially declare itself a neutral country that will never join the US-led NATO military bloc. Kiev insists the Russian offensive was completely unprovoked and has denied claims it was planning to retake the two republics by force.

https://www.rt.com/russia/556164-lim...efeat-ukraine/

[T3rminator]

There are reports that Russian forces have captured territory in Ukraine roughly the size of Spain (sourced from Sky News so not sure how true). They also seem to have control of the Zaporizhia NPP, largest in Europe, key strategic ports, and access to the Black Sea and Sea of Azov. All this whilst using old ineffective equipment against $billions of sophisticated weapons. Yikes.

An interesting update from Ritter. The interviewer challenges some of his earlier statements. Ritter reckons the $40b lend lease act has changed the game on the political front, and it is now unlikely Putin will achieve his political objectives. However, maintains the military objectives will be met, doesn't seem to be in any doubt.

[Falcon SXR8]

So I think I have it worked out and correct me if I'm wrong but according to the best sources presented in this forum, Russia and Ukraine are winning this war

[DJM83]

Originally Posted by Falcon SXR8

So I think I have it worked out and correct me if I'm wrong but according to the best sources presented in this forum, Russia and Ukraine are winning this war

Probably about the extent of whats going on in here.

Bit of 'Im more right than you are' kinda deal in here from some. No way you'd rely in your info from in here

[T3rminator]

Originally Posted by Falcon SXR8

So I think I have it worked out and correct me if I'm wrong but according to the best sources presented in this forum, Russia and Ukraine are winning this war

Neither. The winner at this point in time is the one sitting on the side line feeding the meat grinder.

[FairmontGS]

Originally Posted by Falcon SXR8

So I think I have it worked out and correct me if I'm wrong but according to the best sources presented in this forum, Russia and Ukraine are winning this war

Sort of

Obviously we all agree that if the war continues to its natural conclusion, Putinland will lose, either economically or militarily or both.

A country with a GDP only $1B greater than ours isn't going to be able to compete indefinitely with the might of NATO and the USA.

[PhilT2]

Originally Posted by T3rminator

There are reports that Russian forces have captured territory in Ukraine roughly the size of Spain (sourced from Sky News so not sure how true). They also seem to have control of the Zaporizhia NPP, largest in Europe, key strategic ports, and access to the Black Sea and Sea of Azov. All this whilst using old ineffective equipment against $billions of sophisticated weapons. Yikes.

The truth is usually the first thing to die in a war but some facts are easy to check. If the Russians had captured an area the size of Spain that would be about 85% of Ukraine (Spain 500,000sqkm Ukraine 600,000sqkm) What the Russians actually control is a strip of the coastline about 159k wide and maybe 1000km long. They do have control of most of Ukraine's ports. Not that it matters; they control the Black Sea so even if Ukraine could load ships they couldn't go anywhere.

Ritter claims that farmers in Ukraine are not planting this years crop of wheat. I doubt this is true; I've seen reports that between 50-80% has been done. The issue is what happens when it is harvested. The silos are still full with last years crop and many are in Russian hands anyway. Putin has no reason to make any concessions, the shortage will force up prices worldwide and Russia as a major grain producer will do nicely. So will Australia.

I think Ukraine will continue to lose ground at least until many of the new weapons have reached the front and troops have become competent in their use. Training up reinforcements will also take time. This is all a long way from over.

[PhilT2]

Aussie killed in Ukraine.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-05-...eill/101107898