Anyone still glued to this?

[Hairy-Joe]

I'm also reminded of WW2 and the summer of '40 to end of '42 where the Allies looked completely beaten. Loosing in North Africa, the Atlantic, France beaten, Malta hanging on etc. Yet the Allies won.

Russia has used a massive amount of it's newer armaments. Yes it has hundreds of acres of old equipment but not all of it is serviceable. They have been trying to take Bakhmut for months and are loosing so much armaments. From reports, it looks like Russia is taking troops from the Zaporizhia to support their push in Bakhmut. Is that similar to Hitler pulling troops from the southern Volga, allowing the encirclement?

The one thing that's certain is Russia won't win. The EU leaders have gone too far to pull their support as they know Latvia, Estonia and Lithuania would be following Moldova in being next invaded by Russia.

[Hairy-Joe]

Also, given the massive amounts of equipment Ukraine captured after the fall of Kerson, I've not heard of it being used. I imagine it's waiting for the push.

Another elephant is Belarus, as Lukashenko has ran to the UAE, along with the family.....

[isha]

The one thing that's certain is Russia won't win.

What does that look like - Russia not winning?
Really visualise it.
What way does Russia look slinking back, defeated, a smashed power, it's tail between its legs, made fools of in front of the whole world?

I just don't see that happening, not because I think Russia will be militarily victorious. I think they can't win militarily against NATO. (Although with Iran, India, China, it might even pull that off, but I don't see it.)

What happens when Russia is losing, when it's clear to them that they won't win, is the Russian oligarchy has nothing left to lose. And why not use nuclear weapons when you have nothing left to lose?

Which is why all this fighting talk from all sides needs to stop. Peace negotiations now.

[Hairy-Joe]

Russia can't win. They won't be able to take the entire country. If they do hold onto a piece, there will be guerilla attacks for years. Economic sanctions will remain and the economy will suffer massively.

The Russian Oligarchy want to spend their millions in Paris, New York, Dubai, etc like they always have. They don't want to be stuck on visits to Sochi without their big cars, luxury shopping trips, etc. Any wealth they have in Russia could be impounded for "war efforts".

It could end up with Ukraine not winning either if Russia holds onto a piece of Ukraine.

[knownunknown]

But there are two of you in this discussion! One believes every bit of NATO propaganda and the other every bit of pro-Russian propaganda. As for me, I really don't know but I err on the side of caution in writing off the Russians and I do believe the West rather than Putin created the right environment for this farce to kick-off. So, I'm sitting on the fence.

It’s impossible to know the true numbers of deaths and equipment etc.. due to the fog of war. It’s all belief at various levels. The Russians are not nearly as affected by the war as the Ukrainians though, it’s the Ukrainians that are paying the price by losing their homes, electricity, business, jobs, farms, livelihoods, apartments, shopping centres, schools, etc…

Anyone hinting at Ukraine winning (like most of western media) is either lying or delusional in my opinion. The winning conditions Zelensky has outlined are far removed from reality and will never be achieved.

[CelticRambler]

What does that look like - Russia not winning?
Really visualise it.
...
What happens when Russia is losing, when it's clear to them that they won't win, is the Russian oligarchy has nothing left to lose. And why not use nuclear weapons when you have nothing left to lose?

The oligarchy will most certainly not want anyone using nuclear weapons, because that will ruin any chance they have of getting out of this mess. Russia "not winning" will look like the break-up of the Soviet Union, and the break-up of Yugoslavia.

There are already cracks in the so-called Commonwealth of Independent States, and there is undisguised resentment in the poorer regions of the Russian Federation that they're expected to pay for the Kremlin's war, far more than Moscow or St. Petersburg. It's no coincidence that the Kremlin is having to devote increasing resources also to internal security measures aswell as Putin's invasion.

Russia not winning will inevitably require a comprehensive review of what the Russian Federation means and who wants to be part of it.

Anyone hinting at Ukraine winning (like most of western media) is either lying or delusional in my opinion. The winning conditions Zelensky has outlined are far removed from reality and will never be achieved.

They're the same conditions de Valera outlined for Ireland a little over a hundred years ago, and he didn't have the advantage of a general public absolutely determined to rid their country of a horde of brutal invaders. And at least Zelenskyy has set out reasonable terms for a cessation of hostilities; all we're getting from the Russian side is a stream of hate, spite and schoolyard bully's threats.

[KHD]

Russia can't win. They won't be able to take the entire country. If they do hold onto a piece, there will be guerilla attacks for years. Economic sanctions will remain and the economy will suffer massively.

The Russian Oligarchy want to spend their millions in Paris, New York, Dubai, etc like they always have. They don't want to be stuck on visits to Sochi without their big cars, luxury shopping trips, etc. Any wealth they have in Russia could be impounded for "war efforts".

It could end up with Ukraine not winning either if Russia holds onto a piece of Ukraine.

Them three words you typed there- "Russia can't win" Going by the current state of Nato's weapons stocks and manpower the only logical conclusion to these three words is Nuclear conflict. While Nato countries combined air capabilities, as in numbers of aircraft, are superior to Russian army airpower, they will be flying into territory or launching stand off attacks against the most sophisticated air defense systems on the planet, so it will primarily be the land based high intensity industrial warfare that we are seeing in Ukraine. The American force in Europe currently and even if they increased this by a couple of hundred thousand more combat ready troops, which they dont have by the way, cannot sustain a long term war with Russia on European soil due to geography, even if they were to set up supply routes bringing in supplies the ships would be sunk as they crossed the Atlantic by Russian subs. It would be the same for the Russians if they fought the same type of war against the Americans from Mexico. They would not be able to sustain a war against America in their own back yard.

So the only option of defeating Russia on the European continent in my view would be nuclear war.

People will have to accept that Ukraine is going to loose territory in this, Crimea will never be relinquished as it is critical for Russia's Black Sea fleet. The Donbass will also be taken, the question is how far will Russia go in this and so far no one knows.

This will be a huge headache for Russia in the future, but the reality I see is that the longer this goes on, the more territory will be taken. Easy for European, US and Nato political leaders to cheer on Ukraine but again my point in all of this is that no matter how brave the Ukrainian people are in fighting this, no matter how motivated, when you come up against firepower and manpower, with the ability to sustain munition production on a massive scale as I see with the Russian army currently and the Western countries throwing together a hodge podge of systems that are not in the right quantities and that the Ukrainians will receive the minimal training on, they will not be able to overcome this and to me it is highly immoral to be putting Ukrainians in this position where they continue to die in huge numbers when western leaders themselves know damn well that the weaponry they are handing over will not change the outcome, nevermind the morality of the Russian decision to invade.

It's time this war is ended, but what western governments need to do, and really your talking about the United States here, is that talks be organised, without stupid preconditions like the Russians withdraw from Crimea, when they know full well they won't do.

But as I said, eventually this will be resolved via diplomatic means, but in the meantime, while the political sphere do fook all and go about this fantasy land they live in, when most of their militaries are now advising that Ukraine cannot win this, tens of thousands more Ukrainian and Russian troops will die and be maimed for life.

[isha]

..all we're getting from the Russian side is a stream of hate, spite and schoolyard bully's threats.

I can't enumerate them off hand but over the past year I have seen various reports of attempted negotiations including from Russia. I remember the pre war requests for NATO not to expand so close to Russia. (This would be similar to America not wanting a Russian presence in say Mexico.) Even a few days ago the former Israeli PM Naftali Benett (about whom I know zero) says he was involved in a peace negotiation with Ukraine and Russia which was scuppered by the US. So on the whole I don't believe this statement by you.

[CelticRambler]

Also, given the massive amounts of equipment Ukraine captured after the fall of Kerson, I've not heard of it being used. I imagine it's waiting for the push.

One significant problem they have is that that old Soviet equipment uses old Soviet ammunition, and that's in very short supply - especially as they keep blowing up the stocks the Russians bring over the border. Ukraine has quite recently started making its own compatible shells so as to get as much use as possible out of these old units, but these things take time.

For those who might be interested, here's the link to the previously mentioned article about battlefield survival rates, Russia compared to Ukraine. [google translate, slightly buggy in the middle]

[KHD]

I can't enumerate them off hand but over the past year I have seen various reports of attempted negotiations including from Russia. I remember the pre war requests for NATO not to expand so close to Russia. (This would be similar to America not wanting a Russian presence in say Mexico.) Even a few days ago the former Israeli PM Naftali Benett (about whom I know zero) says he was involved in a peace negotiation with Ukraine and Russia which was scuppered by the US. So on the whole I don't believe this statement by you.

The interview with the former Isreali PM is very interesting.

[Hairy-Joe]

I think Russia couldn't accept that all the former Warsaw Pack countries in Europe saw the benefit of the EU and the freedom it brought. They hadn't a notion of going back.

Russia's actions to Georgia, Chechnya, Crimea, Moldova etc pushed the Eastern Europe countries (Latvia Estonia Lithuania Poland etc) more towards NATO for protection. They saw Russia start the same push for "oppression of ethnic Russians" in these countries (pushed by RT) as the start of the Russian play that they did in Georgia, Moldova, Chechnya, etc.

[Setanta]

I can't enumerate them off hand but over the past year I have seen various reports of attempted negotiations including from Russia. I remember the pre war requests for NATO not to expand so close to Russia. (This would be similar to America not wanting a Russian presence in say Mexico.) Even a few days ago the former Israeli PM Naftali Benett (about whom I know zero) says he was involved in a peace negotiation with Ukraine and Russia which was scuppered by the US. So on the whole I don't believe this statement by you.

Aye,but rocking across the border committing war crimes against civilians isn't the solution to failed negotiations..... Ukraine with an ongoing insurgency would not been allowed into NATO,and Russia could have kept it ticking over indefinitely



Russia have utterly failed to take bakhmut and should been captured 3 weeks ago, relatively easily after that salt mine town withdrawal.....I think they are in a dogfight and the pressure/ambition of its leadership to take more ground will leave it weakened to counter attacks

Up to recently I'd have taught Russia held somewhat of an upper hand,but their stragedy of pouring so much resources into what is a supply line point to Ukraine front is a folly of unimaginable foolishness,they could strike that railway/infrastructure with ease with rockets and cripple it,their drive to capture it is what I see, driven mostly by ego of its general's to snap back at Wagner group,and egos will tend to override logic,which is endpoint for rational/calculated decision,and a mutiny shouldn't be ruled out in these circumstances....

the stories leaked of the slaughter about bakhmut will be talked on for generations like balkens are spoke about nowadays




Edit: I suspect it will end in a DMZ of circa 100km (or Donbass regions) between Russia and NATO/Ukraine potentially patrolled by UN peacekeepers

[KHD]

Post to end the night for me. Well worth a listen, Colonel MacGregor's latest interview on Ukraine. A previous poster tried to put a slur on this man that he is somehow a Russian propagandist, this is nonsense and nothing could be further from the truth, a real American and respected military figure. This man has been through wars and knows the human cost involved in war and how pointless war is in terms of loss of life and the destruction of a country and its people. He is also realist and understands his enemy, instead of what I see currently which is based mostly on cliques, lack of any sort of historical or current understanding of the enemy and the hysterical and frankly childish rubbish I'm both reading and listening to on the Internet, from our political leaders and news outlets. There are two wars being waged in Ukraine, one is the online war that has little basis in reality and the other is what is actually happening on the ground where people either ignore through wilful ignorance or cannot accept reality. As Albert Einstein said "I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones" We are moving dangerously close to this point and both America and Russia need to come together and start talking to each other, without preconditions and get to a situation where this can be stopped and de-escalated, for the sake of the planet. Good night.

[isha]

Way back in September 2022 on page 4 of this thread we were talking about the blowing up of the Nord stream pipelines.

I don't know who did it for sure but a good motive for the US to do it was to blow up the chances of Europe being reliant on Russian gas. I think one underlying motivation for promoting this whole terrible situation was to nip in the bud closer contact and inter-reliance between Europe and Russia.

Anyway Seymour Hersch says America blew up the pipeline's.

https://seymourhersh.substack.com/p/how ... ord-stream

Last June, the Navy divers, operating under the cover of a widely publicized mid-summer NATO exercise known as BALTOPS 22, planted the remotely triggered explosives that, three months later, destroyed three of the four Nord Stream pipelines, according to a source with direct knowledge of the operational planning.

Two of the pipelines, which were known collectively as Nord Stream 1, had been providing Germany and much of Western Europe with cheap Russian natural gas for more than a decade. A second pair of pipelines, called Nord Stream 2, had been built but were not yet operational. Now, with Russian troops massing on the Ukrainian border and the bloodiest war in Europe since 1945 looming, President Joseph Biden saw the pipelines as a vehicle for Vladimir Putin to weaponize natural gas for his political and territorial ambitions.

Asked for comment, Adrienne Watson, a White House spokesperson, said in an email, “This is false and complete fiction.” Tammy Thorp, a spokesperson for the Central Intelligence Agency, similarly wrote: “This claim is completely and utterly false.”

Biden’s decision to sabotage the pipelines came after more than nine months of highly secret back and forth debate inside Washington’s national security community about how to best achieve that goal. For much of that time, the issue was not whether to do the mission, but how to get it done with no overt clue as to who was responsible.

There was a vital bureaucratic reason for relying on the graduates of the center’s hardcore diving school in Panama City. The divers were Navy only, and not members of America’s Special Operations Command, whose covert operations must be reported to Congress and briefed in advance to the Senate and House leadership—the so-called Gang of Eight. The Biden Administration was doing everything possible to avoid leaks as the planning took place late in 2021 and into the first months of 2022.

President Biden and his foreign policy team—National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan, Secretary of State Tony Blinken, and Victoria Nuland, the Undersecretary of State for Policy—had been vocal and consistent in their hostility to the two pipelines, which ran side by side for 750 miles under the Baltic Sea from two different ports in northeastern Russia near the Estonian border, passing close to the Danish island of Bornholm before ending in northern Germany.

The direct route, which bypassed any need to transit Ukraine, had been a boon for the German economy, which enjoyed an abundance of cheap Russian natural gas—enough to run its factories and heat its homes while enabling German distributors to sell excess gas, at a profit, throughout Western Europe. Action that could be traced to the administration would violate US promises to minimize direct conflict with Russia. Secrecy was essential.

[kadman]

US interests have always been at the forefront of the decision making in the US policy for whats best for them, and the people, planet, and human interests come in way down the list. History tells us this even with the most recent wars seen on the planet.

[Hairy-Joe]

The ISW is saying the initiative is with Russia and it's spring campaign has started

https://understandingwar.org/background ... ary-8-2023

[Setanta]

The ISW is saying the initiative is with Russia and it's spring campaign has started

https://understandingwar.org/background ... ary-8-2023

Russia preparing for a long war, oligarchs prepare to further enrich emselves,

Putin TBF,is no fool,when comes to keeping his own country in check/follow him.....still think Ukraine needs outside troops on the ground,but noone is willing to step into the ring with em it seems

[Del.Monte]

The instant any country is stupid enough to put its forces in on the ground, air or sea and that's the end of us all. As it is the West is playing with fire by contemplating supplying jet fighters. It really is approaching a point where Russia's military are going to say enough is enough and either Putin or his successor are going to be goaded into doing something catastrophic. Where's the UN?

[Hairy-Joe]

Ya, there's various reports of Putin trying to transition the economy to a wartime footing. If successful, this could drag into winter 2024....

Putin is doing a lot of sabre rattling but every time he rattled it with a threat, he never followed up on the threats. The West is at this stage going "ya whatever" when Putin sabre rattles. The boy who cried wolf comes to mind. Also, there's a lot of West help with weapons, intelligence, wargames, etc without them putting boots on the ground.

[Hairy-Joe]

The UN is gone the way of the League of Nations before WW2

[kadman]

US has never taken any guidance from the UN, let alone abide by any of their resolutions......unless of course it suited american interests.

[Hairy-Joe]

US has never taken any guidance from the UN, let alone abide by any of their resolutions......unless of course it suited american interests.

So true. Palestine comes to mind

[knownunknown]

Way back in September 2022 on page 4 of this thread we were talking about the blowing up of the Nord stream pipelines.

I don't know who did it for sure but a good motive for the US to do it was to blow up the chances of Europe being reliant on Russian gas. I think one underlying motivation for promoting this whole terrible situation was to nip in the bud closer contact and inter-reliance between Europe and Russia.

Anyway Seymour Hersch says America blew up the pipeline's.

https://seymourhersh.substack.com/p/how ... ord-stream

Very detailed and not yet denied by the powers that be, Hersh is a Pulitzer Prize winning investigative journalist.

[Mirabeau]

Very detailed and not yet denied by the powers that be, Hersh is a Pulitzer Prize winning investigative journalist.

I'd take anything that yoke says with a pinch of salt.

[CelticRambler]

... Hersh is a Pulitzer Prize winning investigative journalist.

This kind of thing really annoys me, when it's offered up as some kind of validation for someone's expertise. Yerman won his Pulitzer Prize more than fifty years ago, when he was in the prime of his young adulthood. Now he's an old codger and I doubt very much that his "investigative" journalism is any more rigourous or actively researched than any one else with access to the internet and time to hang out with "sources". Is he right in this case? Maybe. Or maybe not. It seems that, in offering up a detailed explanation, he's allowed others to demonstrate that those same details are somewhat shaky.

The situation with the bould Colonel is the same. Yes, he was a Colonel in the US Army - but he quit twenty years ago, having been three times passed over for promotion. He slunk away into academic obscurity and had to wait for the Second Coming of the Messiah to the White House before getting some fresh attention. Again, he was passed over for a significant role (US Ambassador to Germany) before finally landing a job as a White House Advisor. His adoring fans, who believe in his every false prophecy despite each one going the way of the repeated Great Redemption deadlines, pronouce this like as and ultimate testatment to his infallibility, quietly glossing over the fact that he was an advisor to an acting secretary and held the job for a mind-blowing eight weeks. Sure, that's one week longer than Liz Truss was Prime Minister, but at least she can legitimately claim to have been Top Dog for those seven week. McGregor was just a flea on the back of one of Trump's poodles.