Russia-Ukraine war and related tensions Megathread

[Mopsus]

Obviously this is not unexpected, but good to see him also acknowledging it.

Why is it good?

[Omega21]

Obviously this is not unexpected, but good to see him also acknowledging it.

Why is it good?

Because it is common sense.

Claiming "we will not stop until we get every inch of our land back" would be foolish, considering the fact that any UA troops crossing into Crimea (if it got that far) would get cooked by FOABs at best, tactical nukes at worst.

No point in firing up the population to expect such things if they are not feasible. If he did so, he would look like a loser in the eyes of the public even if he managed to press Russia into withdrawing to the pre war status quo, which would in reality be a massive win.

[Storr]

This account claims the Ukrainian offensive includes crossing the Inhulets River.

https://twitter.com/Osinttechnical/status/1530630366905638912?s=20&t=oqU5doB...

If this really is a major offensive, including a river crossing, the goal is probably to cutoff elements of the 49th Combined Arms Army on the western side of the Dnieper. This map indicates there aren't many Russian units in the area.

For reference, Davydiv Brid is 12 kilometers downstream (as the crow flies) from Velyka Oleksandrivka. Bilohirka is 6 kilometers downstream from Davydiv Brid. 1 BTG (assuming at full strength) is 900 to 1,000 men.

https://twitter.com/rainbow78521/status/1529095542680309761?s=20&t=6I09UXZlP...

[Mopsus]

Obviously this is not unexpected, but good to see him also acknowledging it.

Why is it good?

Because it is common sense.

Claiming "we will not stop until we get every inch of our land back" would be foolish, considering the fact that any UA troops crossing into Crimea (if it got that far) would get cooked by FOABs at best, tactical nukes at worst.

No point in firing up the population to expect such things if they are not feasible. If he did so, he would look like a loser in the eyes of the public even if he managed to press Russia into withdrawing to the pre war status quo, which would in reality be a massive win.

I’m inclined to think that the opposite is true. Telling your people that parts of their country will remain under foreign occupation in perpetuity must be bad for morale right now, which is worse than something being bad for morale a year from now.

[pppolitics]

https://twitter.com/KyivIndependent/status/1530651557624266755

[Skill and Chance]

Obviously this is not unexpected, but good to see him also acknowledging it.

Why is it good?

Because it is common sense.

Claiming "we will not stop until we get every inch of our land back" would be foolish, considering the fact that any UA troops crossing into Crimea (if it got that far) would get cooked by FOABs at best, tactical nukes at worst.

No point in firing up the population to expect such things if they are not feasible. If he did so, he would look like a loser in the eyes of the public even if he managed to press Russia into withdrawing to the pre war status quo, which would in reality be a massive win.

I’m inclined to think that the opposite is true. Telling your people that parts of their country will remain under foreign occupation in perpetuity must be bad for morale right now, which is worse than something being bad for morale a year from now.

His position feels pretty rational to me.  There are legitimate reasons to think a multi-year war would go poorly for Ukraine, especially now that they have reached the point where their continuing existence as a free country is not really in doubt.  Russia does have nukes and 3X as many people to throw at the war if they felt existentially threatened.   

I definitely don't think they should make a deal until they have taken their shot at recapturing Kherson, though.

[Mopsus]

Obviously this is not unexpected, but good to see him also acknowledging it.

Why is it good?

Because it is common sense.

Claiming "we will not stop until we get every inch of our land back" would be foolish, considering the fact that any UA troops crossing into Crimea (if it got that far) would get cooked by FOABs at best, tactical nukes at worst.

No point in firing up the population to expect such things if they are not feasible. If he did so, he would look like a loser in the eyes of the public even if he managed to press Russia into withdrawing to the pre war status quo, which would in reality be a massive win.

I’m inclined to think that the opposite is true. Telling your people that parts of their country will remain under foreign occupation in perpetuity must be bad for morale right now, which is worse than something being bad for morale a year from now.

His position feels pretty rational to me.  There are legitimate reasons to think a multi-year war would go poorly for Ukraine, especially now that they have reached the point where their continuing existence as a free country is not really in doubt.  Russia does have nukes and 3X as many people to throw at the war if they felt existentially threatened.   

I definitely don't think they should make a deal until they have taken their shot at recapturing Kherson, though.

In my mind I’m drawing a distinction between private strategy and publicly-announced strategy. I wouldn’t be surprised if Ukraine lacked the ability to retake parts of its country occupied by Russia before the February 24 invasion, but I wouldn’t announce this publicly until the war was coming to a close.

[Storr]

Instead of sending tanks to Ukraine Scholz is posting this:

https://twitter.com/GermanyNATO/status/1530166800490680320?s=20&t=yPngl6RQgx...

[TiltsAreUnderrated]

Instead of sending tanks to Ukraine Scholz is posting this:

https://twitter.com/GermanyNATO/status/1530166800490680320?s=20&t=yPngl6RQgx...

Germany might have less of a gas shortage if he wasn’t huffing the supply.

[windjammer]

Let's home the kherson offensive will Work. It would be a complete humiliation for the russians

[DINGO Joe]

Let's home the kherson offensive will Work. It would be a complete humiliation for the russians

Again, with caveat that I know nothing about military strategy and tactics, I doubt this is a full scale attempt to take Kherson.  I doubt the Ukrainians have developed the trained manpower to do something like that yet.  Kharkiv was the first time there was actual evidence of Ukrainians using infantry, tanks and artillery in an offensive manner.  This very well could be the second time and they may be trying to pick their "spot"  for a modest offensive and isolation of some Russian troops.   

The war is still really about attrition.  I've been on vacation and haven't back read the thread to see if anyone posted the video of the train of old Russian T-62s coming out of storage, but if the Russians are already having to dole that stuff out they're already showing  some big cracks.

On the note of attrition, there's some video out there of a substantial fire in Donets that's supposed to be a Russian ammo depot.   

[Logical]

Instead of sending tanks to Ukraine Scholz is posting this:

https://twitter.com/GermanyNATO/status/1530166800490680320?s=20&t=yPngl6RQgx...

Germany might have less of a gas shortage if he wasn’t huffing the supply.

It's hard to decide which one is more embarrassing between Macron calling Putin like a lovesick teenager and Scholz's self indulgent philosophical navel gazing act.

[The Mikado]

https://mobile.twitter.com/MrKovalenko/status/1530595518639915008

Interesting.  Hopefully they have intentionally prioritized this over the Donbas, moving troops, etc. in a way that could explain the recent difficulties in the east?

I think it's kind of the reverse: that Russia going ALL IN on the Severodonetsk attack like we've been hearing, by definition, means that they're, well, ALL IN and that that just leaves attacking them somewhere else, if you can do it, a very tempting option.

Actually TAKING BACK Kherson is a massively optimistic goal, though. Taking a major city without leveling it is complicated at best.

That said, even if they can push significantly closer to it and seriously threaten it, it might draw the Russians away from their current push in Severodonetsk and force them to send forces back to hold Kherson, taking some pressure off.

[The Mikado]

As for pre-Feb 24th territory, all I'll say is that Crimea always has been a logistical nightmare to invade by land from the north. You have to push through and absolutely tiny chokepoint. Your forces are exposed to naval bombardment on all sides. It's just really, really difficult.

THAT SAID, pre-Feb-24th Donetsk and Luhansk are a massively different story if (big if) we ever get to the point where Russian lines break. There's basically no terrain defense there, just a bunch of geographically large old industrial towns that are now down to like a third of their original population tops.

An 800k person city like Donetsk was is hard to take. A city designed for 800k with <250k living in it like Donetsk is now? That's a bit of a different story. Giant expanse of deserted hollowed out emptiness.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

https://twitter.com/lapatina_/status/1530495048382656513

Further evidence that the NYT editorial board is a uniquely pathetic bunch even by the low standards of American punditry.

It's a shame that the phrase "armed only with their hatred of moral clarity" comes from a crappy Randian Sword of Truth novel, because it perfectly describes the people at the NYT.

Instead of sending tanks to Ukraine Scholz is posting this:

https://twitter.com/GermanyNATO/status/1530166800490680320?s=20&t=yPngl6RQgx...

Germany might have less of a gas shortage if he wasn’t huffing the supply.

It's hard to decide which one is more embarrassing between Macron calling Putin like a lovesick teenager and Scholz's self indulgent philosophical navel gazing act.

Scholz, by a lot. FBM is at least not weakening or slow-rolling actual EU/NATO policy decisions as part of his shtick.

[Buffalo Mayor Young Kim]

Instead of sending tanks to Ukraine Scholz is posting this:

https://twitter.com/GermanyNATO/status/1530166800490680320?s=20&t=yPngl6RQgx...

But like, if you shoot back isn’t that just as bad?

[Hindsight was 2020]

So Russian bots have been spamming Twitter the past 2 hours saying they took control of Severodonetsk and well let’s just say that it’s not a real accurate picture of the battle

https://mobile.twitter.com/MrKovalenko/status/1530729919684268032

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Instead of sending tanks to Ukraine Scholz is posting this:

https://twitter.com/GermanyNATO/status/1530166800490680320?s=20&t=yPngl6RQgx...

The comment was made at a large gathering of Catholic laity ('Katholikentag' - a major social and political event in Germany) and was part of a general defence of increasing German military spending and sending arms and money that can be used to buy arms to Ukraine to an audience not terribly keen on either. Unfortunately the language used in the bit quoted there is a little ponderous and the translation a little too literal which makes it easy for a certain type of grifting conspiracy theorist (and I'm afraid there's a lot of this about now: there are obvious parallels with the sillier end of Resistance Twitter during the Trump administration) to make it go viral without context. Always check where something has come from.

[Hindsight was 2020]

https://mobile.twitter.com/TheStudyofWar/status/1530886503760646144

[urutzizu]

Instead of sending tanks to Ukraine Scholz is posting this:

https://twitter.com/GermanyNATO/status/1530166800490680320?s=20&t=yPngl6RQgxYDd_6UjyOzhA

The comment was made at a large gathering of Catholic laity ('Katholikentag' - a major social and political event in Germany) and was part of a general defence of increasing German military spending and sending arms and money that can be used to buy arms to Ukraine to an audience not terribly keen on either. Unfortunately the language used in the bit quoted there is a little ponderous and the translation a little too literal which makes it easy for a certain type of grifting conspiracy theorist (and I'm afraid there's a lot of this about now: there are obvious parallels with the sillier end of Resistance Twitter during the Trump administration) to make it go viral without context. Always check where something has come from.

This would be an correct point in and of itself (although I am not sure about the "translation a little too literal" part - if anything in the the German version the implication of "darf" is actually worse than the English translation "can").

The problem is, it is literally almost every day something like this happens. The German readout from the phone call yesterday almost makes you want to cry: "Putin assured..." "Putin agreed...", Scholz and Macron "took positive note...", Scholz, Macron and Putin "agreed on the central role of the United Nations" (The French readout has nothing of the like). This is a guy who is in the process of committing a genocide, and condemning large swaths of the world's most vulnerable people to starvation.

And I would even have some tolerance for Scholz if there was the convenient excuse of "it's not a Scholz problem, it's a German problem", "he has to do this to keep the German people onside". This would have even been correct right up until 24/2, I actually believed this for a long time.
No! No other Minister does this. Literally every opinion poll shows he is out of step with a clear majority of the German population, and even his own coalition. He is getting criticized from journalists across almost the entire media spectrum, centre-left and centre-right. It is increasingly tenuous for me, as a guy who voted for the SPD and actually *wants* to support him, to find excuses every. single. time. - other than: he genuinely believes this.

[Skill and Chance]

https://mobile.twitter.com/MrKovalenko/status/1530595518639915008

Interesting.  Hopefully they have intentionally prioritized this over the Donbas, moving troops, etc. in a way that could explain the recent difficulties in the east?

I think it's kind of the reverse: that Russia going ALL IN on the Severodonetsk attack like we've been hearing, by definition, means that they're, well, ALL IN and that that just leaves attacking them somewhere else, if you can do it, a very tempting option.

Actually TAKING BACK Kherson is a massively optimistic goal, though. Taking a major city without leveling it is complicated at best.

That said, even if they can push significantly closer to it and seriously threaten it, it might draw the Russians away from their current push in Severodonetsk and force them to send forces back to hold Kherson, taking some pressure off.

Is this still true if a majority of the local population wants you back?  It looks like the WWII Allies took back Paris in less than a week of fighting, 2 weeks if you count armed resistance by the locals in anticipation. 

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Oh the general Comms strategy from him has been absolutely catastrophic (even this is a good example: putting random chunks from a speech or public meeting on twitter is a very bad idea and demonstrates a complete failure to understand how that particular platform works) and I've no intention of defending that, or his longstanding habit of speaking and writing in a circumlocutionary manner that almost feels like a parody of a German politician of his generation, which is definitely not ideal when people want clarity and are right to want it. But things that are untrue and misleading should still be highlighted as untrue and misleading.

[TiltsAreUnderrated]

https://mobile.twitter.com/MrKovalenko/status/1530595518639915008

Interesting.  Hopefully they have intentionally prioritized this over the Donbas, moving troops, etc. in a way that could explain the recent difficulties in the east?

I think it's kind of the reverse: that Russia going ALL IN on the Severodonetsk attack like we've been hearing, by definition, means that they're, well, ALL IN and that that just leaves attacking them somewhere else, if you can do it, a very tempting option.

Actually TAKING BACK Kherson is a massively optimistic goal, though. Taking a major city without leveling it is complicated at best.

That said, even if they can push significantly closer to it and seriously threaten it, it might draw the Russians away from their current push in Severodonetsk and force them to send forces back to hold Kherson, taking some pressure off.

Is this still true if a majority of the local population wants you back?  It looks like the WWII Allies took back Paris in less than a week of fighting, 2 weeks if you count armed resistance by the locals in anticipation.  

The Nazis were being driven back everywhere else in France at that time, so a quick collapse in Paris was feasible. It's possible the partisans can make the Russian occupation of Kherson much shorter, but their army is not yet collapsing on all other fronts in the same way as Germany's was. Taking the actual city now probably means significant urban destruction, but the smaller settlements and open areas surrounding it can be fought over with fewer civilian casualties.

If Ukraine managed to take areas to the east of Kherson (over the Dnieper), they could plausibly threaten the only bridges Russia has to the city itself (which is west of the river). Russia might then pull out for fear of being encircled in a city that isn't key to holding the land bridge to Crimea. This is all easier said from an armchair than done on the battlefield - I'd imagine Russia is offering a firmer defence in that area east of the river to begin with.

[TiltsAreUnderrated]

Foreign Policy is reporting Ukraine received an unspecified number of Su-25 ground attack jets in disassembled form, which were being prepared for delivery in Eastern Europe. Pro-Ukrainian sources like NEXTA are putting the number at 14, but I wouldn't treat that as confirmed.

It's big news that they are finally being given jets of some sort. There aren't that many Su-25 operators, so here are the best bets:

1. Bulgaria has the most - it acquired 40 over decades, most since retired but possibly not disposed of. It's still operating some of these today, but its government hasn't officially approved delivery of military aid. It might be sending some clandestinely, but this seems unlikely. It has approved repair of Ukrainian equipment on Bulgarian soil, so this could be a repaired Ukrainian airframe. The article probably should have mentioned repair rather than aid if this was the case.
2. North Macedonia has four placed into long-term storage/retired (not clear which) in the 2000s after being bought off Ukraine.
3. Czechia has 20-25, but they were retired in the 2000s. It's been months since the war's began, so reactivating a small number by this point might (?) be plausible depending on the condition they were stored in.
4. The US has a couple held by private operators.

[Storr]

Good. Ukraine should retake the city to solve Stremousov's dilemma. 

https://twitter.com/felix_light/status/1530598535799922690?s=20&t=C7pGFXDweG...