Russia-Ukraine war and related tensions Megathread

[Antonio the Sixth]

https://twitter.com/dril/status/473265809079693312

[Antonio the Sixth]

Friendly reminder that gas stocks are almost full in every EU country right now, and that is expected to get us through the Winter. Maybe not comfortably, and certainly not cheaply, but all the same.

[Antonio the Sixth]

I suspect Woodbury's criticism (and Russia's) comes not from the striking of the bridge but the means of delivery (allegedly, a truck bomb) - which is why the criticism is louder than it was when the Antonovsky Bridge was struck with GMLRS. Vehicle bombs, especially those involving a guy who willingly goes up in the blast, have been dismissed as nothing more than a terror tactic for some time now.

Part of the reason for this is the requirement for fanaticism/devotion on behalf of someone who premeditates a suicide attack (which most vehicle bombs, though not all, require). Another reason is that so many vehicle-borne IEDs are used in terrorist attacks outside of active conflicts, and these almost always capture the public consciousness more than (often unsuccessful) strikes on military targets. Tinfoil hat time, but I believe a third reason for this is the frustration of great powers when their long-range strike capabilities are countered with lower-cost asymmetric warfare.

Yet, the VBIED - if that is indeed what was used in this case - can have military value in attacks like these and can also serve as a poor man's artillery/air support. What made IS so successful was not their ability to blow up Shia mosques but the use of VBIEDs to break through enemy lines. It would be unwise for most militaries to adopt them for a variety of reasons, but they need to be understood as tactical weapons rather than just terror bombs so that they can be countered.

I mean, whether or not we classify it as terrorism is ultimately irrelevant to the morality of the situation. There are circumstances where terrorism is a legitimate tactic, and this is undeniably one of them - we all believe this, unless we want to also condemn WW2 partisans. So if this was a terrorist attack, we can only hope for more terrorist attacks to be carried out against the terrorist state of Russia.

[Antonio the Sixth]

I suspect Woodbury's criticism (and Russia's) comes not from the striking of the bridge but the means of delivery (allegedly, a truck bomb) - which is why the criticism is louder than it was when the Antonovsky Bridge was struck with GMLRS. Vehicle bombs, especially those involving a guy who willingly goes up in the blast, have been dismissed as nothing more than a terror tactic for some time now.

Part of the reason for this is the requirement for fanaticism/devotion on behalf of someone who premeditates a suicide attack (which most vehicle bombs, though not all, require). Another reason is that so many vehicle-borne IEDs are used in terrorist attacks outside of active conflicts, and these almost always capture the public consciousness more than (often unsuccessful) strikes on military targets. Tinfoil hat time, but I believe a third reason for this is the frustration of great powers when their long-range strike capabilities are countered with lower-cost asymmetric warfare.

Yet, the VBIED - if that is indeed what was used in this case - can have military value in attacks like these and can also serve as a poor man's artillery/air support. What made IS so successful was not their ability to blow up Shia mosques but the use of VBIEDs to break through enemy lines. It would be unwise for most militaries to adopt them for a variety of reasons, but they need to be understood as tactical weapons rather than just terror bombs so that they can be countered.

I mean, whether or not we classify it as terrorism is ultimately irrelevant to the morality of the situation. There are circumstances where terrorism is a legitimate tactic, and this is undeniably one of them - we all believe this, unless we want to condemn WW2 partisans. So if this was a terrorist attack, we can only hope for more terrorist attacks to be carried out against the terrorist state of Russia.

The primary benefit of a terrorist attack is causing terror - often, this is really just a proxy for making partisans feel good about themselves, and can be of questionable of utility. The primary benefit of a bridge attack is screwing with logistics. This looks like an entirely different kettle of fish.

That's fair, although the psychological impact of the bridge's destruction on both the Russian population and the Kremlin leadership is a non-negligible side-effect. I'm not particularly wedded to any given definition of terrorism here - my point is merely that Ukraine has every right to engage in terrorism regardless, if doing so advances its military objectives.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Tonight Macron promised France will send more SAMs and radars to Ukraine shortly. He also confirmed that a deal is in the works with Denmark in order to redirect 6 CAESARs that were going to be sold to it to instead go to Ukraine (though the timing on that is unclear).

[Antonio the Sixth]

There's no better telltale sign of a pseudointellectual than someone who insists on a hyperspecific definition of fascism that happens to exclude any current political movement or regime with obvious and glaring similarities to historical fascism.

[Antonio the Sixth]

https://twitter.com/KevinRothrock/status/1582434857761718273?s=20&t=liBBie_T...

It's odd that we're seeing so much anticipation (including some outright fake news a few days ago) about a Ukrainian Kherson offensive by Russian sources. I have to wonder if there's anything to it or if it's all information warfare, but I'm also not clear on what Russia stands to gain by scaring its own people sh*tless about an upcoming offensive.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Putin must be so relieved by this point -he knows now he can depend on the Republican Party to come through for him in the end.  All he has to do is hold on for just a few more months until Congress changes hands in January:

McCarthy: No 'blank check' for Ukraine if GOP wins majority

Congress should just authorize, like, a trillion dollars of military aid to Ukraine at the DoD's discretion during the lame duck session. There, nothing McCarthy can do to undo that.

[Antonio the Sixth]

It is more important for Ukraine to prevent Russia from withdrawing the nearly 30,000 troops it has in and around Kherson through cutting off Russian access to the Dnieper than it is to recapture the city itself.  The loss of such a large contingent of (relatively) better trained and equipped troops through encirclement (and eventual mass surrender) would be a bigger blow to Russia than the loss of Kherson:

Ukraine poised for crucial blow to Putin in battle for Kherson

It is not clear all of those troops are on the left bank of the Dnieper. More importantly, Ukraine faces a real dilemma here as it is trying to save its land and people, not simply own the Russians. If it continues to besiege, or outright assault, a city full of trapped Russians, it will gain the following:

- Better chance of neutralising the troops you mentioned
- Probably more opportunities to capture equipment
- Better chance of preventing kidnappings of civilians in Kherson

It will lose:

- Opportunities to take advantage of fleeing Russians with easier escape routes (the Kharkiv morale breakdown)
- The avoidance of urban warfare as an attacker

This latter disadvantage is huge. Urban warfare is a bloody slog which may not work, will kill more civilians, exacerbate rebuilding costs in the aftermath of a successful campaign, and potentially provide Russia with good PR (because the attacker in urban warfare is rarely able to cover themselves in glory).

As I said before - there are no easy answers for Ukraine here. If Russia tries to evacuate men, materiel, collaborators and kidnapped civilians, they’ll have to choose between hurting all of those groups and the city itself or securing the land in a less defiled state but with fewer people saved/stopped.

At the end of the day, Ukraine needs to take as much territory as it can before things start settling down for the Winter. If this is going to be a long war (and it's pretty clear now that it will be at least a medium-length one), actual control over territory becomes paramount. Any territory Russia is able to hold onto for months and years is an area where the tentacles of its authoritarian dystopia can reach and refashion in its own image. Continued administrative control from Russia will go hand in hand with the ethnic cleansing of Ukrainians and the establishment of mechanisms of social control. Yes, civilians will die if Ukraine attacks, but if Ukraine doesn't take back those places, the entire communities living there will die.

[Antonio the Sixth]

For the love of God people stop engaging posters who are engaging in bad faith and do nothing but drag the conversation down. Stop. Just stop. There's an ignore button. Use it.

[Antonio the Sixth]

I thought the argument against Russia blowing the dam is that Crimea water supply would be doomed, but maybe they assume it's doomed anyway.

From ISW yesterday:

Any claims that Russian forces would not blow the dam due to concerns for the water supply to Crimea are absurd. Crimea survived without access to the canal flowing from the Dnipro since Russia illegally invaded and annexed it in 2014 through the restoration of access following Russia’s invasion in February 2022. Russian officials have demonstrated their ability to indefinitely supply Crimea with water without access to the canal. Russian forces will try to hold eastern Kherson Oblast not for the water, but rather to provide a buffer zone that enables the defense of Crimea and prevents Ukrainian forces from getting into artillery range of the peninsula.

[Antonio the Sixth]

It's so odd to have a (supposedly) devout Muslim be supportive of a war started by an Orthodox nation, which has a long history of repressions, deportations, and genocide against Muslims. We know the obvious reason why he supports Russia (they put his father in power and have bankrolled his "Republic" in Chechnya ever since).

Kadyrov is nothing but Chechnya's Quisling, a man who sold out his country to become Putin's enforcer there. It's not surprising in the slightest that he's making a mockery of his faith too. He doesn't care about Islam any more than he cares about his countrymen - all he cares about is himself.

And BTW, real Chechen patriots are out there fighting - on Ukraine's side.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Yes, I'm sure Chechens thought they were getting a very good deal when their cities were being leveled to the ground by Putin. Truly an enviable deal there.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Yes, I'm sure Chechens thought they were getting a very good deal when their cities were being ground into dust by Putin. Truly an enviable deal there.

My man, I don't think you're aware of the history of Chechnya within Russia didn't stop in the year 2000, or how crazy the separatists where, or how many billions of bucks have gone into building up Grozny, or the broader understanding of how Putin handles Muslim issues (He sees us as a constituency to placate lest anything bad occur from the most radical and misled of us).
Your frame of reference is incredibly limited.

Wow, you're so enlightened. Here I was thinking razing an entire country was bad, but you've really opened my eyes.

I don't know why I even bother with you. The day you'll realize that geopolitical issues involve the real lives of real human beings and aren't just an excuse to showcase your superior intellect, maybe you'll be worth engaging with.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Yes, I'm sure Chechens thought they were getting a very good deal when their cities were being ground into dust by Putin. Truly an enviable deal there.

My man, I don't think you're aware of the history of Chechnya within Russia didn't stop in the year 2000, or how crazy the separatists where, or how many billions of bucks have gone into building up Grozny, or the broader understanding of how Putin handles Muslim issues (He sees us as a constituency to placate lest anything bad occur from the most radical and misled of us).
Your frame of reference is incredibly limited.

Wow, you're so enlightened. Here I was thinking razing an entire country was bad, but you've really opened my eyes.

I don't know why I even bother with you. The day you'll realize that geopolitical issues involve the real lives of real human beings and aren't just an excuse to showcase your superior intellect, maybe you'll be worth engaging with.

Point to where I have said the Russians weren't terrible in how they conducted themselves in the Chechen War (something I've actually made reference to multiple times in-thread - querying to someone months ago about whether Russian tactics cause unnecessary casualties). There can be two bad sides in a war.

None of what you said here is actually relevant to the point at hand, yet you keep bringing it up as if it changes anything to the moral stakes at hand. You keep doing this constantly with everything - every time a Russian war crime is unearthed, you make sure to point out Ukrainians have done bad stuff too (often incredibly minor or purely speculative stuff, mind you). It's like you're allergic to the very notion of moral clarity.

[Antonio the Sixth]

https://twitter.com/JimmySecUK/status/1587470288651943937?s=20&t=dMYLO5jNK9N...

We keep getting these reports and then nothing changes in terms of territorial control. It's been going on for like two months at this point. Clearly something is happening there but it's hard to trust any Twitter takes about it.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Refurbished T-72s still sound better than the kind of tanks Russia has been fielding lately tbf.

[Antonio the Sixth]

https://twitter.com/bayraktar_1love/status/1591059482968494080

Doesn't look like a depopulated husk to me...

[Antonio the Sixth]

The videos coming out are reminiscent of the liberation of Paris. An instantly legendary day in military history.

Kherson outragé, Kherson brisé, Kherson martyrisé... mais Kherson libéré!

[Antonio the Sixth]

https://www.twitter.com/BMoens/status/1596060373484179457

This is utterly pathetic on the EU's part. Even leaving aside Putin's role:

"The biggest point of tension in recent weeks has been Biden’s green subsidies and taxes that Brussels says unfairly tilt trade away from the EU and threaten to destroy European industries. Despite formal objections from Europe, Washington has so far shown no sign of backing down. "

What kind of braindead logic is that?? We should all be encouraging green energy right now. If the IRA's energy investments put Europe at a disadvantage, guess what, Europe should do the same! Of course, that would require not being single-mindedly focused on budgetary austerity...

[Antonio the Sixth]

https://www.twitter.com/BMoens/status/1596060373484179457

This is utterly pathetic on the EU's part. Even leaving aside Putin's role:

"The biggest point of tension in recent weeks has been Biden’s green subsidies and taxes that Brussels says unfairly tilt trade away from the EU and threaten to destroy European industries. Despite formal objections from Europe, Washington has so far shown no sign of backing down. "

What kind of braindead logic is that?? We should all be encouraging green energy right now. If the IRA's energy investments put Europe at a disadvantage, guess what, Europe should do the same! Of course, that would require not being single-mindedly focused on budgetary austerity...

I think they are objecting to the idea of subsidizing buyers to buy American rather than European. It really has nothing to do with green energy. It's one thing to try to limit economic dependency on predatory autocratic nations, it is quite another to do it with nations that pose no such issues.

I suspect I would be annoyed to. I suspect as an American I would be annoyed, once I understand the facts more definitively.

Fair enough, but this still seems to be missing the forest for the trees. Europe needs a green investment plan on par with the IRA, and the only reason they're not doing anything of the like is because of the austerity dogma. If they want to respond to Biden's "buy American" program with a "buy European" program, while not ideal, it's still a way to level the playing field.

[Antonio the Sixth]

The current Crimean population "wants to be Russian" because a large chunk of it are literally Russians whom Putin encouraged to settle there, after he had deported the Tatars and other groups who very much did not want to be Russian. In other words, exactly what he's trying to do with Eastern Ukraine now.

Settling the situation there will be a mess no matter what, but using Putin's ethnic cleansing as justification for Crimea remaining Russian is a dangerous logic to uncritically accept.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Interesting timing:

https://twitter.com/Osinttechnical/status/1605703372992135168?s=20&t=gVcyGIm...

In 2014, Rozogin published a book called Alaska Betrayed and Sold: The History of a Palace Conspiracy. Yes this something commonly talked about in Russian nationalist circles, that the Czar's sale of Alaska in 1867 was somehow fraudulent and thus Alaska rightfully belongs to Russia.

This isn't just some publicity seeking influencer, before being appointed head of Roscosmos, Rozogin was Russia's ambassador to NATO from 2008 to 2011.

https://twitter.com/christogrozev/status/1605763128259620864?s=20&t=b_eUV-FW...

the puns just write themselves here

[Antonio the Sixth]

We're going help Ukraine and make Russia pay for it folks.
https://twitter.com/AndrewDesiderio/status/1605984424717193216

“Those have been worked out” ie it’s the US government and the US government will take what it will.

Yep.

F**k around, find out.

[Antonio the Sixth]

https://twitter.com/reshetz/status/1596535482443530240?s=20&t=8RLUUCGNbsxiHq...

Much is made of Kyiv and Kharkiv holding strong during the early days of the war, and rightfully so: they ensured that the Ukrainian state as such would survive, functionally guaranteeing a Russian strategic defeat regardless of how the rest of the war went. However, Mykolaiv holding strong was also a crucial turning point. Until then, Russia had been able to run rampant across the South of the country, and there was a real possibility that they could come to overtake the entire coastline. Without Mykolaiv, that became impossible. Odessa was perhaps the biggest prize Putin could realistically hope for after the first week of the war, but now even it is out of reach. Ukraine continues to be a maritime country and is now even able to export grain against Russia's wishes. This is fundamental to its future as a sovereign country, and it has Mykolaiv's heroic defenders to thank for.