|
Post by partickpotter on Jun 1, 2022 11:39:58 GMT
Indeed. I doubt the Russians who look to Kyivan Rus for inspiration will be taking that into account. And probably as Kyiv was the original capital, shouldn't Russia fall under Kyiv While we are on the subject of historical claims to land, we should mention the Tatars of Crimea. This people were the natives of Crimea until Stalin decided he’d punish them by shipping the population en masse to Siberia. So Russia’s claim to Crimea is also bogus. It should be handed back to the Tatars - along with suitable compensation. Fat chance.
|
|
|
Post by mtrstudent on Jun 1, 2022 15:00:27 GMT
Twitter thread on what Germany's sending. Claims: vehicles to Czechia/Greece so they can send to Ukraine but most importantly: - 12 modern self-propelled howitzers. Some of the best on Earth and Germany has just ~100 working right now. - 4 modern rocket launcher vehicles, Germany has ~40 total. - At some point in the future, modern medium-range anti-aircraft trucks Not fast enough but it shows how limited the German army is. If everyone gave over 10 % of their modern artillery forces to Ukraine then Russia would be in serious trouble. The Netherlands and Norway have been very generous given their size too.
|
|
|
Post by mtrstudent on Jun 1, 2022 15:12:23 GMT
Germany is knocking 90 % off the price of local trains etc to try and save petrol & diesel. I'd hope our government is looking into that, even if just for a few months it'll buy time and hopefully blunt the price shocks a bit.
|
|
|
Post by mtrstudent on Jun 1, 2022 15:23:11 GMT
Biden agrees to send rocket launcher trucks. I can't find the thread but apparently these are beasts. They can park, get GPS targets and launch within minutes then drive off before they shot back. Even some modern Russian ones have to be manually stabilised, then someone has to target through a freaking telescope type thing while spinning a big handle to move the targeting. It takes ~15 minutes. Also: American rocket accuracy is within 5 metres, Russian is within 170 metres. No joke. Rocket artillery is difficult because the ammo is enormous so supplying it is hard, and you're vulnerable to planes. But if Biden has the balls to deliver 72 of them like the Ukrainian rumours suggeset, then that sounds huge. Even if you ignore the main battle, Snake Island is within their range and satellites show a bunch of expensive Russian anti aircraft vehicles there. It'd be a real shame if they were blown to shit.
|
|
|
Post by questionable on Jun 1, 2022 15:28:58 GMT
Germany is knocking 90 % off the price of local trains etc to try and save petrol & diesel. I'd hope our government is looking into that, even if just for a few months it'll buy time and hopefully blunt the price shocks a bit. [ The government should monitor what companies are charging for their petrol, Morrison’s Market Drayton was 1.68, Nantwich Morrison’s was 1.60, now they’re increasing prices yet again. Helping the public my arse
|
|
|
Post by RichieBarkerOut! on Jun 1, 2022 16:09:54 GMT
Twitter thread on what Germany's sending. Claims: vehicles to Czechia/Greece so they can send to Ukraine but most importantly: - 12 modern self-propelled howitzers. Some of the best on Earth and Germany has just ~100 working right now. - 4 modern rocket launcher vehicles, Germany has ~40 total. - At some point in the future, modern medium-range anti-aircraft trucks Not fast enough but it shows how limited the German army is. If everyone gave over 10 % of their modern artillery forces to Ukraine then Russia would be in serious trouble. The Netherlands and Norway have been very generous given their size too. One of the areas that I have to concede that Trump was correct about. Those European leaders that scowled at sat down with a smirk and his arms folded have all shown their arses.
|
|
|
Post by mtrstudent on Jun 1, 2022 16:15:20 GMT
Twitter thread on what Germany's sending. Claims: vehicles to Czechia/Greece so they can send to Ukraine but most importantly: - 12 modern self-propelled howitzers. Some of the best on Earth and Germany has just ~100 working right now. - 4 modern rocket launcher vehicles, Germany has ~40 total. - At some point in the future, modern medium-range anti-aircraft trucks Not fast enough but it shows how limited the German army is. If everyone gave over 10 % of their modern artillery forces to Ukraine then Russia would be in serious trouble. The Netherlands and Norway have been very generous given their size too. One of the areas that I have to concede that Trump was correct about. Those European leaders that scowled at sat down with a smirk and his arms folded have all shown their arses. I get what Germany was doing - it kinda worked with Germany, Japan, S Korea and Taiwan. But trade clearly failed here. Germany's messed up with defence and nuclear power IMO and they're now seeing some consequences.
|
|
|
Post by wannabee on Jun 1, 2022 16:18:48 GMT
Twitter thread on what Germany's sending. Claims: vehicles to Czechia/Greece so they can send to Ukraine but most importantly: - 12 modern self-propelled howitzers. Some of the best on Earth and Germany has just ~100 working right now. - 4 modern rocket launcher vehicles, Germany has ~40 total. - At some point in the future, modern medium-range anti-aircraft trucks Not fast enough but it shows how limited the German army is. If everyone gave over 10 % of their modern artillery forces to Ukraine then Russia would be in serious trouble. The Netherlands and Norway have been very generous given their size too. Hopefully this may put an end to the false and counterproductive anti EU narrative
|
|
|
Post by wannabee on Jun 1, 2022 16:27:22 GMT
|
|
|
Post by misterj on Jun 1, 2022 16:43:37 GMT
Talking of Ukraine in another context …… who would relish the thought of playing footy against (eg Scotland tonight) knowing the whole world (virtually) is rooting for Ukraine, a bit like at the Eurovision!!
|
|
|
Post by mtrstudent on Jun 1, 2022 16:55:55 GMT
Talking of Ukraine in another context …… who would relish the thought of playing footy against (eg Scotland tonight) knowing the whole world (virtually) is rooting for Ukraine, a bit like at the Eurovision!! I'd be supporting Ukraine tonight anyway
|
|
|
Post by misterj on Jun 1, 2022 18:28:58 GMT
Oh definite ….. same …… and if Ukraine get through, their next opponents Wales at the weekend would have the same tag as ‘least supported team globally’
|
|
|
Post by terryconroysmagic on Jun 1, 2022 18:49:25 GMT
What’s happened those updates RichieB used to provide, they seemed to be spot on and excellent
|
|
|
Post by RichieBarkerOut! on Jun 1, 2022 21:59:30 GMT
What’s happened those updates RichieB used to provide, they seemed to be spot on and excellent The school shooting has sent the social media circles that John occupies, into a toxic place, and he's stepped back for a while. Good news, he's back (to an extent), post incoming!
|
|
|
Post by RichieBarkerOut! on Jun 1, 2022 22:02:49 GMT
Good to see a John R Bruning update after a period away. In this briefing, he talks about what I assume is the explanation for why all the rhetoric over the use of nuclear weapons by Russia has calmed down of late. Strategic/West-Russia Update: Today, I sat in on a Zoom seminar given by four Stanford nuclear weapons policy scholars. They were pulled together to discuss a central question of the Ukraine crisis: Will Putin use nuclear weapons? Some takeaways from the discussion: 1. Despite Putin's nuclear saber rattling, there's been no change in posture of the Russian strategic forces. No nuclear weapons have been removed from storage (this is where their tactical weapons are located), and the "special alert" Putin mentioned on Feb. 27th simply added a few extra personnel to the command and control system for their strategic forces. So, the posturing, public comments and CGI videos of the UK & the US getting nuked are not being matched by concrete, threatening moves with the actual missiles. All talk. So far. 2. Scott Sagan (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scott_Sagan) pointed out that he believes the likelihood of Russian use of nuclear weapons in Ukraine has diminished send the end of February and early March. The disaster in front of Kyiv forced Putin to scale back the war's aims and that, Sagan believes led to a lowering of the chance for nuclear use. IE: nobody is going to use nuclear weapons in a limited war, especially in territory they want to annex. 3. That said, everyone on the panel agreed the West and the U.S. in particular needs to think through what our response would be to a Russian nuclear attack in Eastern Europe. It turns out there is. The Pentagon has created a "Tiger Team" to game board scenarios and come up with responses. 4. Potential NATA/US Responses: It really depends on how the nuclear weapon was employed. Options include: a.) A demonstration use, including in the Black Sea. This is seen as the most unlikely scenario. b.) Military target, such as an airfield or on the battlefield. c.) Terror attack on a city to break Ukrainian resolve to resist. Sagan pointed out that in 2016, there was a senior level exercise in the US among key members of the Obama Administration that dealt with a Russian nuclear attack on a NATO airbase in the Baltics. The first group of leaders who went through the wargame elected to strike the base from which the nuclear attack originated, destroying it with conventional forces. The second team that went through the next day ended up employing NATO nuclear weapons on three targets in Belarus, even though Belarus was not involved in the war, nor did any of the Russian attacks on the Baltics originate from Belarussian territory. Exactly how we would respond is pretty much deliberately vague, but the most likely avenue would be significant conventional response. However, Sagan suggested that the behind the scenes discussions going on by the US and Russian defense leadership & military should be used to quietly and consistently remind the Russians that a nuclear attack on a civilian population would be a massive violation of international law, and the US would declare anyone involved in the chain of command that issued, passed along or executed that order would end up in the dock at the Hague to be tried as a war criminal. The intent here would be to add a sliver of personal deterrence into the Russian military leadership. 5.Rose Gottemoeller Https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rose_GottemoellerRose had some very interesting points to make. She was a member of the negotiating team that worked on the new Strategic Arms Limitation Treaty (START). The Russians have scrupulously abided by the treaty's requirements, including reporting all routine movement of strategic nuclear weapons as they rotate in and out of maintenance facilities, or are relocated to different areas. In one case, just after the war started, they sent 18 notifications to the US in one day detailing movements. They'd never sent that many before, and most saw it as behind-the-scenes message to counter-balance the rhetoric on Russian state TV and from various political leaders in Russia. Additionally, both the US and the Russians are required to submit data bases detailing all nuclear warheads twice a year. The Russians have already submitted the first one. That said, NATO activated its CBRN defense measures and elements for its forward deployed forces in Eastern Europe and the Baltics. CBRN= Chemical, Biological, Radioactive and Nuclear. This was done to protect the troops as well as to send a message to the Russians that the West is ready and if they choose to act, it will not be without consequences. She also pointed out that in recent weeks, Putin toned down some of his rhetoric, especially the May 9th victory speech. As a side note, Rose pointed out that NATO was preparing to pivot to Asia to help contain growing Chinese expansionism. The Russian attack on Ukraine has refocused NATO and made Europe its center of gravity again. 6. What if Putin becomes unhinged and orders an attack? Well, it turns out the Russian defense establishment was concerned at that happening under Yeltsin due to his alcoholism. They placed into the system of series of checks and balances to ensure that a drunk or insane leader could not unilaterally get the missiles launched. The Russians have a system that is similar to ours. They have their own nuclear football, three of them actually. Putin's aids keep one with him at all times, the chief of staff has the second, and the Defense Minister has the third. They cannot launch a nuclear attack without at least 2 of the 3, and possibly all 3 working together to approve and validate it. Overall feeling among the group was the threat of nuclear use is very low. Nuclear terrorism is seen as about a 1% chance event. Rose said today that she thinks the chances in Ukraine are higher, but not by much. Certainly less than 10%.
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Jun 2, 2022 13:49:11 GMT
This is grim.
|
|
|
Post by partickpotter on Jun 2, 2022 14:22:02 GMT
Par for the course for Russia. Forced deportations is what they do.
|
|
|
Post by mtrstudent on Jun 2, 2022 14:33:01 GMT
Par for the course for Russia. Forced deportations is what they do. The level of evil they've shown will hopefully make it clear what Putin's government is made of. You can't negotiate from a position of weakness with evil filth like him, and every person on territory you surrender is at risk of being forced through hell. Tanks, howitzers and rocket launchers are how you save civilians in this case, it would help if the people begging to stop military aid to Ukraine were just honest about how they're fine with the rape, torture, murder and abduction of Ukraine's children.
|
|
|
Post by longdistancekiddie on Jun 2, 2022 21:58:03 GMT
Good to see a John R Bruning update after a period away. In this briefing, he talks about what I assume is the explanation for why all the rhetoric over the use of nuclear weapons by Russia has calmed down of late. Strategic/West-Russia Update: Today, I sat in on a Zoom seminar given by four Stanford nuclear weapons policy scholars. They were pulled together to discuss a central question of the Ukraine crisis: Will Putin use nuclear weapons? Some takeaways from the discussion: 1. Despite Putin's nuclear saber rattling, there's been no change in posture of the Russian strategic forces. No nuclear weapons have been removed from storage (this is where their tactical weapons are located), and the "special alert" Putin mentioned on Feb. 27th simply added a few extra personnel to the command and control system for their strategic forces. So, the posturing, public comments and CGI videos of the UK & the US getting nuked are not being matched by concrete, threatening moves with the actual missiles. All talk. So far. 2. Scott Sagan (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scott_Sagan) pointed out that he believes the likelihood of Russian use of nuclear weapons in Ukraine has diminished send the end of February and early March. The disaster in front of Kyiv forced Putin to scale back the war's aims and that, Sagan believes led to a lowering of the chance for nuclear use. IE: nobody is going to use nuclear weapons in a limited war, especially in territory they want to annex. 3. That said, everyone on the panel agreed the West and the U.S. in particular needs to think through what our response would be to a Russian nuclear attack in Eastern Europe. It turns out there is. The Pentagon has created a "Tiger Team" to game board scenarios and come up with responses. 4. Potential NATA/US Responses: It really depends on how the nuclear weapon was employed. Options include: a.) A demonstration use, including in the Black Sea. This is seen as the most unlikely scenario. b.) Military target, such as an airfield or on the battlefield. c.) Terror attack on a city to break Ukrainian resolve to resist. Sagan pointed out that in 2016, there was a senior level exercise in the US among key members of the Obama Administration that dealt with a Russian nuclear attack on a NATO airbase in the Baltics. The first group of leaders who went through the wargame elected to strike the base from which the nuclear attack originated, destroying it with conventional forces. The second team that went through the next day ended up employing NATO nuclear weapons on three targets in Belarus, even though Belarus was not involved in the war, nor did any of the Russian attacks on the Baltics originate from Belarussian territory. Exactly how we would respond is pretty much deliberately vague, but the most likely avenue would be significant conventional response. However, Sagan suggested that the behind the scenes discussions going on by the US and Russian defense leadership & military should be used to quietly and consistently remind the Russians that a nuclear attack on a civilian population would be a massive violation of international law, and the US would declare anyone involved in the chain of command that issued, passed along or executed that order would end up in the dock at the Hague to be tried as a war criminal. The intent here would be to add a sliver of personal deterrence into the Russian military leadership. 5.Rose Gottemoeller Https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rose_GottemoellerRose had some very interesting points to make. She was a member of the negotiating team that worked on the new Strategic Arms Limitation Treaty (START). The Russians have scrupulously abided by the treaty's requirements, including reporting all routine movement of strategic nuclear weapons as they rotate in and out of maintenance facilities, or are relocated to different areas. In one case, just after the war started, they sent 18 notifications to the US in one day detailing movements. They'd never sent that many before, and most saw it as behind-the-scenes message to counter-balance the rhetoric on Russian state TV and from various political leaders in Russia. Additionally, both the US and the Russians are required to submit data bases detailing all nuclear warheads twice a year. The Russians have already submitted the first one. That said, NATO activated its CBRN defense measures and elements for its forward deployed forces in Eastern Europe and the Baltics. CBRN= Chemical, Biological, Radioactive and Nuclear. This was done to protect the troops as well as to send a message to the Russians that the West is ready and if they choose to act, it will not be without consequences. She also pointed out that in recent weeks, Putin toned down some of his rhetoric, especially the May 9th victory speech. As a side note, Rose pointed out that NATO was preparing to pivot to Asia to help contain growing Chinese expansionism. The Russian attack on Ukraine has refocused NATO and made Europe its center of gravity again. 6. What if Putin becomes unhinged and orders an attack? Well, it turns out the Russian defense establishment was concerned at that happening under Yeltsin due to his alcoholism. They placed into the system of series of checks and balances to ensure that a drunk or insane leader could not unilaterally get the missiles launched. The Russians have a system that is similar to ours. They have their own nuclear football, three of them actually. Putin's aids keep one with him at all times, the chief of staff has the second, and the Defense Minister has the third. They cannot launch a nuclear attack without at least 2 of the 3, and possibly all 3 working together to approve and validate it. Overall feeling among the group was the threat of nuclear use is very low. Nuclear terrorism is seen as about a 1% chance event. Rose said today that she thinks the chances in Ukraine are higher, but not by much. Certainly less than 10%. There is only one country that has ever used a nuclear bombs
|
|
|
Post by longdistancekiddie on Jun 2, 2022 22:01:31 GMT
Germany is knocking 90 % off the price of local trains etc to try and save petrol & diesel. I'd hope our government is looking into that, even if just for a few months it'll buy time and hopefully blunt the price shocks a bit. Who is your government, ?
|
|
|
Post by Huddysleftfoot on Jun 3, 2022 13:25:02 GMT
|
|
|
Post by musik on Jun 3, 2022 14:10:06 GMT
Cancer, where?
|
|
|
Post by lordb on Jun 3, 2022 14:29:40 GMT
|
|
|
Post by questionable on Jun 3, 2022 16:44:38 GMT
Rumour has it it’s blood cancer, Max 4 years or hopefully 4 hours
|
|
|
Post by Gods on Jun 3, 2022 21:18:40 GMT
I hate to say it but I think it is inevitable Russia will win unless the west help out properly as in get involved.
But the opposite is happening, the west has lost interest.
Putin will take Ukraine.
|
|
|
Post by terryconroysmagic on Jun 3, 2022 21:25:05 GMT
I hate to say it but I think it is inevitable Russia will win unless the west help out properly as in get involved. But the opposite is happening, the west has lost interest. Putin will take Ukraine. Don’t think he’ll take all of Ukraine but he’ll take and hold the East.
|
|
|
Post by stokefc on Jun 3, 2022 21:40:21 GMT
I hate to say it but I think it is inevitable Russia will win unless the west help out properly as in get involved. But the opposite is happening, the west has lost interest. Putin will take Ukraine. I don't think the west has lost interest Gods , you can bet we are proper analysing every aspect and have most of our nuclear arsenal pointing straight at them
|
|
|
Post by mtrstudent on Jun 3, 2022 22:35:04 GMT
I hate to say it but I think it is inevitable Russia will win unless the west help out properly as in get involved. But the opposite is happening, the west has lost interest. Putin will take Ukraine. Do you mean you think he'll take the whole country? How do you think he'd do it and how long would it take? Since the first rush, his army hasn't had a single successful attack more than ~70 km from a controlled railway station.
|
|
|
Post by Gods on Jun 3, 2022 23:27:18 GMT
I hate to say it but I think it is inevitable Russia will win unless the west help out properly as in get involved. But the opposite is happening, the west has lost interest. Putin will take Ukraine. Do you mean you think he'll take the whole country? How do you think he'd do it and how long would it take? Since the first rush, his army hasn't had a single successful attack more than ~70 km from a controlled railway station. Putin already holds one fifth of Ukraine and if he cuts off the Black Sea the games up.
|
|
|
Post by Gods on Jun 3, 2022 23:40:23 GMT
I hate to say it but I think it is inevitable Russia will win unless the west help out properly as in get involved. But the opposite is happening, the west has lost interest. Putin will take Ukraine. I don't think the west has lost interest Gods , you can bet we are proper analysing every aspect and have most of our nuclear arsenal pointing straight at them I think it has. The UK and the USA have done okay but it has been a shameful effort from France, Italy, Spain, Netheralands, Belgium, the Nordics you name it, absolutely fuck all. And from Europes largest economy, Germany, nothing, except a few helmets. The story is now relegated on the news to somewhere between Collen Rooney and the French Open tennis!
|
|