Russia-Ukraine war and related tensions Megathread

[Flyersfan232]

There is this problem:

https://twitter.com/yarotrof/status/1506869254326566913

The Ukrainians are doing so much killing that they are running out of weapons and ammunition, esp. antitank and antiaircraft missiles.

We need to do better than this at supplying them weapons.

They are literally fighting the war for us, for our values.

ww3 happens and the world is over

[Badger]

If they can't show how any specific bit of information is wrong, and they aren't posting any information of their own, then they can go suck eggs.

This is nonsense. Reports about a war from belligerents are always questionable due to the clear bias and interests of the reporting party. They are expected to produce reports exaggerating their wins and downplaying their losses. Any thinking person should automatically question their reliability. The burden of proof is on the Ukrainians (or the Russians) to prove that they are telling the truth, not on us to refute them.

 As was previously noted, you talk a big game about "disinformation"  "looking at both sides" "trying to get multiple sources" And "telling things as they are rather than as we want them to be" . And yet, as was also pointed out, you habitually actually do the exact opposite of all those things.

You sir, are the biggest purveyor of BS propaganda in this thread rather than factual dissemination.

[Torie]

If they can't show how any specific bit of information is wrong, and they aren't posting any information of their own, then they can go suck eggs.

This is nonsense. Reports about a war from belligerents are always questionable due to the clear bias and interests of the reporting party. They are expected to produce reports exaggerating their wins and downplaying their losses. Any thinking person should automatically question their reliability. The burden of proof is on the Ukrainians (or the Russians) to prove that they are telling the truth, not on us to refute them.

The use of legal terms when it comes to battlefield assessments is misplaced. I think most of the posters here realize that the factual details of any news story or source might not be 100% accurate, and some will be false news, and that if false, given the pace of events, that will become readily apparent. Given the variety of sources of news, unless the herd mentality has trumped all else, when there is wide agreement regarding something, occam's razar would suggest that such reports should be taken seriously, even if there is still a possibility for error.

I also don't recall reading anything put out by Ukraine sources that proved to be deliberate false news. It may have happened, but if it did, having paid great attention to this thread, Ukraine has not made a habit of it.

[Silent Hunter]

Russia has only three of these ships total: https://tpyxa.net/2022/03/24/ukrainian-forces-have-heavily-damaged-but-most-likely-destroyed-a-russian-alligator-class-landing-ship-in-berdyansk

Imagine what would have happened if they got the Mistrals.

[CumbrianLefty]

So much disinfo and wishcasting. It's okay to condemn Russia but let's be honest about this situation.

90% of this thread is misinformation as it is gathered from total misinformation from Twitter.......followed by 10% wishcasting. Interesting choice of word, but it fits well.

You are spot on.

I would not suggest reporting on any war has ever been any different.

 You say this in a tone that implies you have have specialized knowledge as to "what's supposedly REALLY going on".  Pray, do educate us.

MIGHTY RUSSIA is achieving a GLORIOUS VICTORY in CLEANSING UKRAINE OF NAZIS, of course!

But you won't read/hear/see anything about this in our bIaSeD cOrPoRaTe MsM!!??!??!!111!!!!

[It’s so Joever]

I haven’t been talking much about the frontlines recently because…well they’ve kinda been still for a while now. The Mariupol pocket shrinks a bit each day, Russian backed forces made a few minor advances in Donetsk and Luhansk, the Ukrainians counter attacked a bit in Kyiv area and Mykolaiv/Kherson oblast, but otherwise not much. This really is entering a war of attrition, and that’s terrible for both sides, although worse for Ukraine.

[DaleCooper]

I haven’t been talking much about the frontlines recently because…well they’ve kinda been still for a while now. The Mariupol pocket shrinks a bit each day, Russian backed forces made a few minor advances in Donetsk and Luhansk, the Ukrainians counter attacked a bit in Kyiv area and Mykolaiv/Kherson oblast, but otherwise not much. This really is entering a war of attrition, and that’s terrible for both sides, although worse for Ukraine.

It's much worse for Ukraine's population but if it turns into a war of attrition then it basically ensures that Russia will accomplish nothing from this invasion other than the destruction of its own economy and the disgrace of its political leadership and military capabilities. Russia's crimes against Ukraine have also ensured that under absolutely no circumstances will any significant portion of the Ukrainian population accept Putin's or Russia's interference in their country or culture for generations.

[TiltsAreUnderrated]

I haven’t been talking much about the frontlines recently because…well they’ve kinda been still for a while now. The Mariupol pocket shrinks a bit each day, Russian backed forces made a few minor advances in Donetsk and Luhansk, the Ukrainians counter attacked a bit in Kyiv area and Mykolaiv/Kherson oblast, but otherwise not much. This really is entering a war of attrition, and that’s terrible for both sides, although worse for Ukraine.

It's much worse for Ukraine's population but if it turns into a war of attrition then it basically ensures that Russia will accomplish nothing from this invasion other than the destruction of its economy and the disgrace of its political leadership and military capabilities. Russia's crimes against Ukraine have also ensured that under absolutely no circumstances will any significant portion of the Ukrainian population accept Putin's or Russia's interference in their country or culture for generations.

It does not ensure this. A war of attrition only continues so long as key capabilities remain intact.

There are areas where Ukraine is probably more able to replenish itself than Russia - man-portable/light weapons with which it is being restocked by its allies.

There are areas where it is not clear which side is better able to regenerate its own capabilities. Manpower is one of these - the ISW indicates that Russia can bring in significant amounts of new combat power within months. Whether Ukraine can mobilise even more people in the long run is an open question.

Finally, there are areas where Russia is in a better position to slow or reverse attrition - heavy weaponry, air defences, etc. Ukraine has a smaller defence industry, it doesn't domestically manufacture most of what it uses and its infrastructure for limited repair and replacement is currently being degraded. On a long enough timeline, it could retrain its units on Western systems, and on a short timeline, it could be restocked with the limited Soviet/Russian systems in Western countries. However, this could be a bit more expensive and complicated for the West than just giving light weapons to Ukraine, and there's little indication that the easier part - giving old Soviet systems to Ukraine - is happening.

The war might become more unpopular in Russia as it grinds on, but Ukraine could also see a slow decline in international support as "conflict fatigue" sets in abroad.

Personally, I think a war of attrition leans in Russia's favour - at least, in the conventional phase. It is likely to lead to eventual Russian air superiority/supremacy, and then they can go on the offensive again.

[Person Man]

I haven’t been talking much about the frontlines recently because…well they’ve kinda been still for a while now. The Mariupol pocket shrinks a bit each day, Russian backed forces made a few minor advances in Donetsk and Luhansk, the Ukrainians counter attacked a bit in Kyiv area and Mykolaiv/Kherson oblast, but otherwise not much. This really is entering a war of attrition, and that’s terrible for both sides, although worse for Ukraine.

The only good point, I guess is 1) the defensive nature of the war, 2) our subsidy of Ukraine, and 3) the need for Russia to watch its back amongst all the other people who bullied it over the years.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Ukraine is in a much better spot for a war of attrition than Russia. The sanctions are devestating Russia and will continue to each month. Meanwhile Ukraine can be resupplied easily, the borders of Poland and Slovakia are still easy supply lines. The Slovakian border hasn't really been hit at all, and Lviv near Poland is the least impacted major city, only a few missle strikes and no urban fighting at all

[DaleCooper]

I haven’t been talking much about the frontlines recently because…well they’ve kinda been still for a while now. The Mariupol pocket shrinks a bit each day, Russian backed forces made a few minor advances in Donetsk and Luhansk, the Ukrainians counter attacked a bit in Kyiv area and Mykolaiv/Kherson oblast, but otherwise not much. This really is entering a war of attrition, and that’s terrible for both sides, although worse for Ukraine.

It's much worse for Ukraine's population but if it turns into a war of attrition then it basically ensures that Russia will accomplish nothing from this invasion other than the destruction of its economy and the disgrace of its political leadership and military capabilities. Russia's crimes against Ukraine have also ensured that under absolutely no circumstances will any significant portion of the Ukrainian population accept Putin's or Russia's interference in their country or culture for generations.

It does not ensure this. A war of attrition only continues so long as key capabilities remain intact.

There are areas where Ukraine is probably more able to replenish itself than Russia - man-portable/light weapons with which it is being restocked by its allies.

There are areas where it is not clear which side is better able to regenerate its own capabilities. Manpower is one of these - the ISW indicates that Russia can bring in significant amounts of new combat power within months. Whether Ukraine can mobilise even more people in the long run is an open question.

Finally, there are areas where Russia is in a better position to slow or reverse attrition - heavy weaponry, air defences, etc. Ukraine has a smaller defence industry, it doesn't domestically manufacture most of what it uses and its infrastructure for limited repair and replacement is currently being degraded. On a long enough timeline, it could retrain its units on Western systems, and on a short timeline, it could be restocked with the limited Soviet/Russian systems in Western countries. However, this could be a bit more expensive and complicated for the West than just giving light weapons to Ukraine, and there's little indication that the easier part - giving old Soviet systems to Ukraine - is happening.

The war might become more unpopular in Russia as it grinds on, but Ukraine could also see a slow decline in international support as "conflict fatigue" sets in abroad.

Personally, I think a war of attrition leans in Russia's favour - at least, in the conventional phase. It is likely to lead to eventual Russian air superiority/supremacy, and then they can go on the offensive again.

This is all very true, but I guess I was thinking more along the lines of whether or not Russia is capable or willing to withstand the prolonged losses that they're experiencing both economically and in terms of human life. Obviously the Russian government doesn't care about human life, but they'll be forced to care if casualties add up to over 10% of their armed forces, which at this rate is a very real possibility. Plus, if they win the war of attrition, they still face the problem of annexing or occupying a country that is totally against their presence, even in the formerly pro-Russia parts of Ukraine. And how much longer can they handle these sanctions? The soft support of China and a handful of sh-thole third world countries won't make up for what they've lost and will continue to lose economically because of this. Plus, as others have mentioned, Russia has made a lot of enemies over the years and now they've just made clear for the whole world to see that their military is incompetent. So you're right, Russia can eventually succeed in taking Kyiv, but at this point I don't see that as a victory for them. This whole abomination marks a huge turning point in Russia's place in the world, and not in favor of Russia.

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

Ukraine is in a much better spot for a war of attrition than Russia. The sanctions are devestating Russia and will continue to each month. Meanwhile Ukraine can be resupplied easily, the borders of Poland and Slovakia are still easy supply lines. The Slovakian border hasn't really been hit at all, and Lviv near Poland is the least impacted major city, only a few missle strikes and no urban fighting at all

Are there any major roads into Ukraine from Slovakia? I know there are a few from Hungary through the Carpathians.

[Torie]

Ukraine is in a much better spot for a war of attrition than Russia. The sanctions are devestating Russia and will continue to each month. Meanwhile Ukraine can be resupplied easily, the borders of Poland and Slovakia are still easy supply lines. The Slovakian border hasn't really been hit at all, and Lviv near Poland is the least impacted major city, only a few missle strikes and no urban fighting at all

The article below kind of channels BRTD. Myself, from my layperson's armchair, I don't see Russia agreeing to squat that would be remotely acceptable, or should be acceptable, to Ukraine, while Putin is calling the shots. How can Putin really? He crossed the Rubicon on a one way road. So my guess is the damn thing grinds on and on and on, until Putin finds a new line of work.


https://www.cnbc.com/2022/03/23/russias-war-of-attrition-with-ukraine-where-nobody-wins.html

[TiltsAreUnderrated]

I haven’t been talking much about the frontlines recently because…well they’ve kinda been still for a while now. The Mariupol pocket shrinks a bit each day, Russian backed forces made a few minor advances in Donetsk and Luhansk, the Ukrainians counter attacked a bit in Kyiv area and Mykolaiv/Kherson oblast, but otherwise not much. This really is entering a war of attrition, and that’s terrible for both sides, although worse for Ukraine.

It's much worse for Ukraine's population but if it turns into a war of attrition then it basically ensures that Russia will accomplish nothing from this invasion other than the destruction of its economy and the disgrace of its political leadership and military capabilities. Russia's crimes against Ukraine have also ensured that under absolutely no circumstances will any significant portion of the Ukrainian population accept Putin's or Russia's interference in their country or culture for generations.

It does not ensure this. A war of attrition only continues so long as key capabilities remain intact.

There are areas where Ukraine is probably more able to replenish itself than Russia - man-portable/light weapons with which it is being restocked by its allies.

There are areas where it is not clear which side is better able to regenerate its own capabilities. Manpower is one of these - the ISW indicates that Russia can bring in significant amounts of new combat power within months. Whether Ukraine can mobilise even more people in the long run is an open question.

Finally, there are areas where Russia is in a better position to slow or reverse attrition - heavy weaponry, air defences, etc. Ukraine has a smaller defence industry, it doesn't domestically manufacture most of what it uses and its infrastructure for limited repair and replacement is currently being degraded. On a long enough timeline, it could retrain its units on Western systems, and on a short timeline, it could be restocked with the limited Soviet/Russian systems in Western countries. However, this could be a bit more expensive and complicated for the West than just giving light weapons to Ukraine, and there's little indication that the easier part - giving old Soviet systems to Ukraine - is happening.

The war might become more unpopular in Russia as it grinds on, but Ukraine could also see a slow decline in international support as "conflict fatigue" sets in abroad.

Personally, I think a war of attrition leans in Russia's favour - at least, in the conventional phase. It is likely to lead to eventual Russian air superiority/supremacy, and then they can go on the offensive again.

This is all very true, but I guess I was thinking more along the lines of whether or not Russia is capable or willing to withstand the prolonged losses that they're experiencing both economically and in terms of human life. Obviously the Russian government doesn't care about human life, but they'll be forced to care if casualties add up to over 10% of their armed forces, which at this rate is a very real possibility. Plus, if they win the war of attrition, they still face the problem of annexing or occupying a country that is totally against their presence, even in the formerly pro-Russia parts of Ukraine. And how much longer can they handle these sanctions? The soft support of China and a handful of sh-thole third world countries won't make up for what they've lost and will continue to lose economically because of this. Plus, as others have mentioned, Russia has made a lot of enemies over the years and now they've just made clear for the whole world to see that their military is incompetent. So you're right, Russia can eventually succeed in taking Kyiv, but at this point I don't see that as a victory for them. This whole abomination marks a huge turning point in Russia's place in the world, and not in favor of Russia.

I agree that the occupation is likely to fail in the long run because the guerrilla resistance will be too strong to bear, but Russia will be prepared to give up more for Ukraine (on its doorstep) than the USSR was for Afghanistan.

You overestimate the sanctions, I think. They are absolutely going to hurt - enough to make the Russian gains as they stand not worth the economic cost - but they aren't going to be the largest factor in pushing Russia back. Russia has endured worse in the 90s than what they are projected to endure now. The initial shock has already been borne, and pulling back carries costs for the legitimacy of the Putin regime that make even a pyrrhic victory better than openly admitting defeat.

Let's assume the West holds to its commitments and weans itself off Russian oil and gas in 2023. There are already exceptions to that - such as Hungary - but even without those, there will be countries from which Europe and the US can buy Russian oil/gas from a third party.

I'm going to point again to Iran, on which sanctions have been much deeper and wider. They did get it to come to the table with respect to the nuclear deal, but beyond that - and especially since the deal fell apart - they have not changed Iranian foreign policy in a way favourable to those imposing them. They are not airtight, and even though they've pushed the economy back into the 1980s, they haven't deterred the government from projecting force abroad. We shouldn't expect a weaker sanctions regime to push Russia out of Ukraine in the long run, although it will damage their war machine to an extent.

[President Johnson]

Joe Biden at NATO summit:

https://twitter.com/terischultz/status/1507049094446989318

Watching him participate in NATO, G7 and EU summits today in Brussels really makes me glad he's at helm in this particular moment. He has been welcomed in Europe with open arms and raising America's reputation among allies significantly after this Trump clownshow. Uncle Joe is making America great again.

[Tintrlvr]

Ukraine is in a much better spot for a war of attrition than Russia. The sanctions are devestating Russia and will continue to each month. Meanwhile Ukraine can be resupplied easily, the borders of Poland and Slovakia are still easy supply lines. The Slovakian border hasn't really been hit at all, and Lviv near Poland is the least impacted major city, only a few missle strikes and no urban fighting at all

Are there any major roads into Ukraine from Slovakia? I know there are a few from Hungary through the Carpathians.

Yes - you can see the main road connecting the Slovakian city of Kosice to the Ukrainian city of Uzhhorod here: https://goo.gl/maps/83m8HLqVEtcLceL87 . Of course everything coming through Zakarpattia Oblast from either Slovakia or Hungary has to then cross the Carpathians to get to the rest of Ukraine, which is a key chokepoint that if Russia were able to control the skies, they'd be able to cut off. Therefore it is much easier to import weapons, etc. via Poland or Romania, which have easy connections to the rest of Ukraine.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Ukraine is in a much better spot for a war of attrition than Russia. The sanctions are devestating Russia and will continue to each month. Meanwhile Ukraine can be resupplied easily, the borders of Poland and Slovakia are still easy supply lines. The Slovakian border hasn't really been hit at all, and Lviv near Poland is the least impacted major city, only a few missle strikes and no urban fighting at all

Are there any major roads into Ukraine from Slovakia? I know there are a few from Hungary through the Carpathians.

There's a actually a decent sized city right on the border, Uzhhorod. Probably the best place to be in Ukraine right now since it's probably the largest city that hasn't seen any fighting or strikes.

[Estrella]

Ukraine is in a much better spot for a war of attrition than Russia. The sanctions are devestating Russia and will continue to each month. Meanwhile Ukraine can be resupplied easily, the borders of Poland and Slovakia are still easy supply lines. The Slovakian border hasn't really been hit at all, and Lviv near Poland is the least impacted major city, only a few missle strikes and no urban fighting at all

Are there any major roads into Ukraine from Slovakia? I know there are a few from Hungary through the Carpathians.

There are surprisingly few roads across the border - official ones, that is - but what BRTD said about Uzhhorod being a major city located where it is more than negates that IMO. Plus, there's a Russian-gauge railway going 80 kilometres into Slovakia - that could be useful too.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Haha, karma's a bitch.

https://twitter.com/RALee85/status/1507092816211726338

[President Johnson]

Biden calls for exclusion of Russia from G20:

https://twitter.com/dwnews/status/1507077036304744451

[dead0man]

If they can't show how any specific bit of information is wrong, and they aren't posting any information of their own, then they can go suck eggs.

This is nonsense. Reports about a war from belligerents are always questionable due to the clear bias and interests of the reporting party. They are expected to produce reports exaggerating their wins and downplaying their losses. Any thinking person should automatically question their reliability. The burden of proof is on the Ukrainians (or the Russians) to prove that they are telling the truth, not on us to refute them.

k

I'd give you sh**t, but I got a feeling life is going to give you plenty over the next couple of decades.  Good luck son.

[Storr]

I doubt this will lead to much (authoritarian police state and whatnot), but something to keep an eye on:

https://twitter.com/KevinRothrock/status/1506995764584722439?s=20&t=SZ94JI9k...

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

I doubt this will lead to much (authoritarian police state and whatnot), but something to keep an eye on:

https://twitter.com/KevinRothrock/status/1506995764584722439?s=20&t=SZ94JI9k...

Only like 15% of people actually report and serve. It's common to find loopholes, bribe officials or even just don't ignore summons and fall through the cracks, Russia isn't known for strictly enforced laws after all.

[Storr]

Biden calls for exclusion of Russia from G20:

https://twitter.com/dwnews/status/1507077036304744451

Replace Russia with Taiwan (it's the #22 economy by nominal GDP). China can cope all it wants, I don't care. Iran is #17, but I don't think replacing one pariah state with another is a great idea. The only other top 25 country not currently a G20 member or represented by the EU's seat, is Switzerland. I'm guessing they aren't a member because of their famous strict neutrality. Switzerland didn't join the UN until 2002, after all.

If the G20 wanted to go in on "the global South", Nigeria is #29 and Thailand #26. The last of the top 30 economies not a part of the G20 or EU is Israel...but I think Saudi Arabia would have something to say about including them.

If the G20 really wanted to give the finger to Russia, they could give Russia's seat to #23 Poland. It's already represented by the EU's seat, but other EU members have their own seats. International organizations are confusing. For context, Ukraine is #55. Which is two spots below Iraq, evidently?!

[Storr]

Cope, Russia.

https://twitter.com/Osinttechnical/status/1507085172080091142?s=20&t=0e302RX...