I would bet on bipolar disorder or vodka.
What is disturbing how much power he has in the conflict. He was not elected to be representative and US doesnt challenge his actions.
There should be some parallels with Prigozhin.
Last edited:
[RD] Russia Invades Ukraine: The 7th Thread Itch; scratch it here!
- Thread starter Birdjaguar
- Start date
- Status
What is disturbing how much power he has in the conflict. He was not elected to be representative and US doesnt challenge his actions.
There should be some parallels with Prigozhin.
Does Ukraine have an extradition treaty with the US? Ukraine should declare him a war criminal and ask the US to send him to the Ukraine for trial. Musk might then be able to make a deal to support them in exchange for his freedom.
Lexicus
Deity
Well I would certainly find it highly amusing if Biden shot down his plane.
Zardnaar
Deity
Basically give Russia enough rope to hang itself.
Sucks for Ukraine but slow escalation is less risky.
Also hindsight if they rushed all that equipment in and Ukraine went tots up its Afghanistan 2.0.
Hard to argue against it after Russias actions as well.
One side slowly trickled in equipment the other side leveled cities, threatens nukes every other weak, weapon used food supplies and has committed numerous war crimes.
Basically also doubles to diplomatically isolate Russia. They essentially have no friends beyond pariah states and even China and India are iffy at best.
Thorgalaeg
Deity
This one is pretty good. $200 million worth most advanced russian anti-ship radar destroyed with a single HIMARS rocket. Talk about cost-benefit.
saamohod
Deity
I'd bet on his self-confessed autism, which makes him vulnerable to psychological manipulations, aggravated by his inflated ego. Both traits make him vulnerable to Kremlin's psyops and brainwashing. Certain financial incentive can't be ruled out either.
Last edited:
Analysis of the current stage of the counteroffensive, and its perspectives.
It has been a while since I published anything long-form commenting on the ongoing Russo-Ukrainian War, and I confess that writing this article gave me a modicum of trouble. Ukraine’s much anticipated grand summer counteroffensive has now been underway for about eighty days with little to show for it. The summer has seen fierce fighting in a variety of sectors (to be enumerated below), but the contact line has shifted very little. I have been reluctant to publish a discussion of the Ukrainian campaign simply because they have continued to hold assets in reserve, and I did not want to post a premature commentary that went to press right before the Ukrainians showed some new trick or revealed a hidden ace up their sleeve. Sure enough, I wrote the bulk of this article last week, right before Ukraine launched yet another major attempt to force a breach in the Orikhiv sector.
At this point, however, the appearance of some of Ukraine’s last remaining premier brigades, which had previously been held in reserve, confirms that the axes of Ukraine’s attack are concretized. Only time will tell if these precious reserves manage to achieve a breach in the Russian lines, but enough time has passed that we can sketch out what exactly Ukraine has been trying to do, why, and why it has failed to this point.
Part of the problem with narrating the war in Ukraine is the positional and attritional nature of the fighting. People continue to look for bold operational maneuver to break the deadlock, but the reality seems to be that for now some combination of capability and reticence has turned this war into a positional struggle with a plodding offensive pace, which far more resembles the first world war than the second.
Ukraine had aspirations of breaking open this grinding front and reopening mobile operations - escaping the attritional struggle and driving on operationally meaningful targets - but these efforts have so far come to naught. For all the lofty boasts of demonstrating the superior art of maneuver, Ukraine still finds itself trapped in a siege, painfully trying to break open a calcified Russian position without success.
Ukraine may not be interested in a war of attrition, but attrition is certainly interested in Ukraine.
<...>
Escaping Attrition: Ukraine Rolls the Dice
It has been a while since I published anything long-form commenting on the ongoing Russo-Ukrainian War, and I confess that writing this article gave me a modicum of trouble. Ukraine’s much anticipated grand summer counteroffensive has now been underway for about eighty days with little to show for it. The summer has seen fierce fighting in a variety of sectors (to be enumerated below), but the contact line has shifted very little. I have been reluctant to publish a discussion of the Ukrainian campaign simply because they have continued to hold assets in reserve, and I did not want to post a premature commentary that went to press right before the Ukrainians showed some new trick or revealed a hidden ace up their sleeve. Sure enough, I wrote the bulk of this article last week, right before Ukraine launched yet another major attempt to force a breach in the Orikhiv sector.
At this point, however, the appearance of some of Ukraine’s last remaining premier brigades, which had previously been held in reserve, confirms that the axes of Ukraine’s attack are concretized. Only time will tell if these precious reserves manage to achieve a breach in the Russian lines, but enough time has passed that we can sketch out what exactly Ukraine has been trying to do, why, and why it has failed to this point.
Part of the problem with narrating the war in Ukraine is the positional and attritional nature of the fighting. People continue to look for bold operational maneuver to break the deadlock, but the reality seems to be that for now some combination of capability and reticence has turned this war into a positional struggle with a plodding offensive pace, which far more resembles the first world war than the second.
Ukraine had aspirations of breaking open this grinding front and reopening mobile operations - escaping the attritional struggle and driving on operationally meaningful targets - but these efforts have so far come to naught. For all the lofty boasts of demonstrating the superior art of maneuver, Ukraine still finds itself trapped in a siege, painfully trying to break open a calcified Russian position without success.
Ukraine may not be interested in a war of attrition, but attrition is certainly interested in Ukraine.
<...>
Verbose
Deity
Prior belief and how to update information – how it's relevant for why no one agrees how the Ukranian counter offensive is really going:
saamohod
Deity
This historical fact may be relevant:
On this day, September 9, 1943, the Allies launched Operation Laguna, a landing at Salerno in southern Italy.
170k British-American-Canadian fighters, against approximately 35k German defenders.
Allies' total numerical superiority with, traditionally, total superiority in the air.
The operation lasted 9 days and ended successfully.
But at a price of 3.2k killed, 10.6k wounded, 6k missing.
With German losses of 0.8k killed, 2k wounded and 0.6k missing.
Bringing this up to address the claim of some that UA offensive is "too slow".
EnglishEdward
Deity
I don't see the speed aspect (claims of too slow) as key.
But there is the unknown loss ratio.
At Salerno; it was 4:1 in favour of the German defenders.
If Ukraine is similarly suffering 4 soldiers killed for every 1 Russian soldier
killed (+ 1 Russian soldier captured); Ukraine runs out of soldiers before Russia.
But there is the unknown loss ratio.
At Salerno; it was 4:1 in favour of the German defenders.
If Ukraine is similarly suffering 4 soldiers killed for every 1 Russian soldier
killed (+ 1 Russian soldier captured); Ukraine runs out of soldiers before Russia.
Akka
Moody old mage.
Sources tend to indicate that actually, Ukraine is having less casualties than Russia.
Some articles argue that the slowness of the offensive is actually due to the very conservative way Ukraine uses its soldiers so as to minimize casualties.
Of course, all this is difficult to check but it stays true that Oryx record a 3/4 to 1 ratio of losses between Russia and Ukraine, so there is at least that, and there is numerous reports of Russia being by now down to equal footing on artillery power, down from a crushing 10 to 1 advantage last year. Make of that what you will.
I also can't help but laugh at the article showing yet again the same case of a handful of Bradley being damaged. Make also of that what you will.
Some articles argue that the slowness of the offensive is actually due to the very conservative way Ukraine uses its soldiers so as to minimize casualties.
Of course, all this is difficult to check but it stays true that Oryx record a 3/4 to 1 ratio of losses between Russia and Ukraine, so there is at least that, and there is numerous reports of Russia being by now down to equal footing on artillery power, down from a crushing 10 to 1 advantage last year. Make of that what you will.
I also can't help but laugh at the article showing yet again the same case of a handful of Bradley being damaged. Make also of that what you will.
G20 statement drops reference to Russia aggression ‘against’ Ukraine
G20 leaders have failed to condemn Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in a joint statement after China and Russia rejected language that blamed Moscow for the conflict, highlighting the lack of global consensus in support of Kyiv. The New Delhi summit declaration refers only to the “war in Ukraine”, a formulation that supporters of Kyiv such as the US and Nato allies have previously rejected as it implies both sides are equally complicit. That statement, hammered out over weeks of negotiations and hours of intense debate between diplomats as the summit was already under way, is a blow to western countries that have spent the past year attempting to convince developing countries to condemn Moscow and support Ukraine.The previous G20 declaration, made in Indonesia last November, referred to “aggression by the Russian Federation against Ukraine”. Western diplomats said China’s refusal to repeat that formulation was critical in pushing host India to propose compromise language.Referring to the war, India’s external affairs minister S Jaishankar said: “It is a fact that this is today a very polarising issue and there are multiple views on this. There are a spectrum of views on this, so I think in all fairness it was only right to record what was the reality in the meeting rooms.”
The declaration called for a “just and durable peace in Ukraine” but did not explicitly link that demand to the importance of Ukraine’s territorial integrity, as western countries had pushed for. It also did not include the statement from the 2022 version that noted “most members strongly condemned the war”.
G20 statement drops reference to Russia aggression ‘against’ Ukraine
Joint language does not condemn Moscow’s invasion after China refused to repeat critical wording
www.ft.com
Verbose
Deity
Which is perverse.G20 statement drops reference to Russia aggression ‘against’ Ukraine
G20 leaders have failed to condemn Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in a joint statement after China and Russia rejected language that blamed Moscow for the conflict, highlighting the lack of global consensus in support of Kyiv. The New Delhi summit declaration refers only to the “war in Ukraine”, a formulation that supporters of Kyiv such as the US and Nato allies have previously rejected as it implies both sides are equally complicit. That statement, hammered out over weeks of negotiations and hours of intense debate between diplomats as the summit was already under way, is a blow to western countries that have spent the past year attempting to convince developing countries to condemn Moscow and support Ukraine.
The previous G20 declaration, made in Indonesia last November, referred to “aggression by the Russian Federation against Ukraine”. Western diplomats said China’s refusal to repeat that formulation was critical in pushing host India to propose compromise language.Referring to the war, India’s external affairs minister S Jaishankar said: “It is a fact that this is today a very polarising issue and there are multiple views on this. There are a spectrum of views on this, so I think in all fairness it was only right to record what was the reality in the meeting rooms.”
The declaration called for a “just and durable peace in Ukraine” but did not explicitly link that demand to the importance of Ukraine’s territorial integrity, as western countries had pushed for. It also did not include the statement from the 2022 version that noted “most members strongly condemned the war”.
G20 statement drops reference to Russia aggression ‘against’ Ukraine
Joint language does not condemn Moscow’s invasion after China refused to repeat critical wording
I suppose large number of captured requires decisive breakthrough. Currently it seems to be relatively low on both sides.
Even G20 members are pissed off by Western hypocrisy and sense of entitlement.
saamohod
Deity
Russia invaded Ukraine. What are you trying to accuse the West of?
I mean we both understand that your statement doesn't hold water and serves purely as an emotional slogan aimed at certain forum members with entrenched anti-Western bias, don't we?
Zardnaar
Deity
Wrll people re still bring diplomatic in how they talk.
Who's really supporting Russia in concrete terms? Iran maybe North Korea.
Hmm depends on concrete terms... like it would be not crazy enough that countries do not fight the agressor but trade with him.
Many of non-western countries seems to be corrupted. They want to eradicate their minorities and smaller neighbours without moralisation of west.
Russians understimated Ukrainian will to survive. But they perfectly calculated that nobody will fight them except invaded country.
Even if they will fail to occupy Ukraine now, it will be a guide for next expansions.
Many of non-western countries seems to be corrupted. They want to eradicate their minorities and smaller neighbours without moralisation of west.
Russians understimated Ukrainian will to survive. But they perfectly calculated that nobody will fight them except invaded country.
Even if they will fail to occupy Ukraine now, it will be a guide for next expansions.
Last edited:
Akka
Moody old mage.
Russia lies and invade Ukraine, but somehow it's the West which is hypocrital and has a "sense of entitlement".
Let me reinterate : Russia, which commit massive war crimes and considers it has the right to invade a neighbour and annex it, is trying to posture about accusing others of "sense of entitlement" and "hypocrisy".
As usual, the best indicator of knowing what Russia is doing, is to write down what they accuse others of doing.
Also, in the usual red_elk fashion, lies and twisting facts are par on the course : it's not "the G20" which are pissed off. It's Russia, with China tiptoeing around. There was definitely another reading of the event :
If it's true that :
[iHowever, there was a noticeable softening of the language around Russia’s role in the Ukraine war compared to last year. All references to Russia, Russian aggression and Russia’s withdrawal in relation to the war in Ukraine that featured in last year’s joint statement at the G20 summit in Bali were removed.][/i]
Which is the part that was unsurprisingly focused upon, let's see the rest :
Instead, the declaration emphasised that states must “refrain from the threat or use of force to seek territorial acquisition” and that “the use or threat of use of nuclear weapons is inadmissible”.
Amitabh Kant, India’s G20 representative, said there was “100% consensus from all countries” on all 83 paragraphs in the declaration.
According to Kant, in order to reach a consensus, there was over 200 hours of “very tough, very ruthless negotiations”. Kant said that Brazil and South Africa, the next two G20 presidents, had played a key role in getting Russia to agree to the language, as well as Indonesia, Turkey and Mexico. A senior EU official said that by Saturday, Russia was “cornered” in the negotiations.
The declaration signifies a major win for India, which holds this year’s G20 presidency. It has been a particularly challenging year for the group, which represents the world’s largest economies, as Russia and China had proved intransigent in discussions around the Ukraine war, climate and energy, derailing attempts for a consensus in previous ministerial meetings.
Not exactly the same picture.
Institute for the Study of War
Ukrainian forces continued offensive operations near Bakhmut and in western Zaporizhia Oblast on September 7 and made further gains on both sectors of the front. Geolocated footage published on September 7 indicates that Ukrainian forces have made
Based on Oryx database, which is the only source you can conclude something of, ratio is 1/3 in favor of Ukraine since the beginning of the war, there was a change since the beginning of the offensive, going down to only 1/2 in favor of Ukraine for armored vehicles (if the war is resolved by attrition, 1/2 in favor of Ukraine is not enough) and raised to 1/4 in favor of Ukraine for artillery, then back down to 1/3 since a few weeks.
it's still hard to extrapolate the ratio for soldiers as Ukraine may have relied more on them than vehicles after the initial losses.
- Status
