The Russian Invasion of Ukraine Part 4

[jimbob]

The difference between 2014 and now is that now Ukraine is able to fight back after the intervening years of preparation. This is their call and their right to decide what's worth what. If they're willing to fight for their territory, then no one else has the right to question that IMO.

If in February Ukrainians had simply looked at their shoes and capitulated, none of this would be happening. The West would've grumbled, but Ukraine would've become a Russian vassal state.

So when discussing compromises and stalemates, all this is worth considering. The Ukrainians know that to cede territory to Russia is suicide, and that includes Crimea and the Donbas. because whether they die fighting or by compromises that merely delay the inevitable, they're still dead.

And it looks like the Ukrainian people have come to a similar conclusion


https://twitter.com/ChristopherJM/status/1529056147679981570?s=20&t=Qg34U18yLF2eEY2zyMnFzQ

Amid foreign chatter about Ukraine making a peace deal or concessions to end Russia’s war against it, this new survey by Kyiv International Institute of Sociology: 82% of Ukrainians say NO territorial concessions should be made; just 10% back some. https://kiis.com.ua/?lang=ukr&cat=r...mEjBiBmJo1Vlz_VIcbbgwqSg45TFt7lxpK38gaRhBsAcs

 

[eerok]

I don't think it is a given which way Putin would jump.

IMO it's very much a given, since holding the grain hostage antagonizes the West, "humanitarian reasons" mean nothing to him, any deal he'd be willing to make in exchange for grain would be ridiculous, and he couldn't be trusted to honor it.

So involving Putin in any way shape or form in an effort to get grain from Ukraine is not a viable plan, and just barreling ahead with NATO any forces would be raw escalation.

 

[ponderingturtle]

So far, Western leaders have only had to gamble with Ukrainian lives, or at least with the lives of people living in Ukraine or those willing to go to Ukraine. Providing naval support for a Ukrainian convoy would be putting sailors in harm's way and an attack on, much less the sinking of, a Western escort ship would require an immediate response.

It's a similar conundrum that NATO faced when considering whether to attempt to implement a no-fly zone though, as Captain Swoop pointed out upthread, a no fly zone may be required in order to keep the convoy and their escorts safe.

It wouldn't be a Ukrainian convoy but a convoy to ukraine to get food for starving people. That is different in perception than unilaterally declaring air power out of use in a war zone.

Does shipping grain out of Ukraine seriously improve their ability to fight the Russians?

 

[eerok]

And it looks like the Ukrainian people have come to a similar conclusion

https://twitter.com/ChristopherJM/status/1529056147679981570?s=20&t=Qg34U18yLF2eEY2zyMnFzQ

Yes, there's no question that the country, people, and culture of Ukraine are on the line here. Russia would gleefully destroy it all, and any foothold given to Putin is one more step toward the death of Ukraine. There's no reasonable bargain to be made with Russia.

 

[The Don]

It wouldn't be a Ukrainian convoy but a convoy to ukraine to get food for starving people. That is different in perception than unilaterally declaring air power out of use in a war zone.

I suppose it depends on which gallery you're playing to.

China, India and a handful of pariah states have declared for Russia. They will consider any convoy, under any circumstances, to be an attack on Russia.

Reports seem to indicate that many countries in the developing world feel badly for Ukrainians but have a deal of residual support for Russia as a counterweight to "the Great Satan". If they need the grain, I'm not sure they care about the circumstances.

The West are already implacably opposed to Russia.

IDoes shipping grain out of Ukraine seriously improve their ability to fight the Russians?

If they're being paid for the grain then, yes, it does.

Any non-aligned country providing convoy support for the grain convoy would add themselves to Russia/China/India's list of enemies so there might not be too many takers.

 

[ponderingturtle]

I suppose it depends on which gallery you're playing to.

China, India and a handful of pariah states have declared for Russia. They will consider any convoy, under any circumstances, to be an attack on Russia.

I think that is overstating it, and if the people starving are in India would they really see getting them food to be an attack on their interests?

Reports seem to indicate that many countries in the developing world feel badly for Ukrainians but have a deal of residual support for Russia as a counterweight to "the Great Satan". If they need the grain, I'm not sure they care about the circumstances.

And that might play well in the third world and get fewer fence sitting.

If they're being paid for the grain then, yes, it does.

Is the extent it could buy weapons meaningful to the extent they are being given weapons for free?

Any non-aligned country providing convoy support for the grain convoy would add themselves to Russia/China/India's list of enemies so there might not be too many takers.

Show me the aid China and India are sending to the Russians. I see China and India as being entirely self serving in this and I don't see why they are for starvation.

 

[crescent]

I disagree.

During the stalemate millions of Ukrainians are likely to be whisked away to who-knows-where and replaced with Russians; Russian forces are able to dig in whilst at the same time laying waste to anything in range of their artillery and carrying out periodic missile strikes in the rest of Ukraine.

IMO a stalemate will quickly become a fait-accompli due to the difficulty in dislodging the Russian forces.

Don't forget: Russia will give all of those Ukrainians Russian passports. Most of the people "evacuated" from Mariupol through to Russia have already been stripped of Ukrainian passports and given Russian passports whether they wanted that or not.

Now Russia and its willing idiots will proclaim a need to protect those "Russians" now and forever. Even if they don't consider themselves to be Russian, even if they return to Ukraine, toss the Russian documents and replace the stolen Ukrainian documents. Russia will still proclaim them to be forever Russian and will forever press the need to protect them.

And they've got plenty of willing idiots (including some on the forum) who will blindly parrot that line in the false name of objectivity or in rejection of mainstream news or whatnot.

 

[The Don]

Is the extent it could buy weapons meaningful to the extent they are being given weapons for free?

Absolutely, though if the money isn't required to buy weapons, it can be used to pay, clothe and feed soldiers and their families, repair infrastructure and ensure that the agricultural sector has capital for next year.

Those latter two are very important IMO because Russia's approach seems to be to destroy the Ukrainian infrastructure and economy and then to stroll into and occupy the destroyed country.

 

[Andy_Ross]

Depends on if they let the ships go by for humanitarian reasons. Nothing forces the Russians to attack

Would you let a fleet in to a port you were blockading?
What would be the point of the blockade?

If they aren't going to stop humanitarian ships why bother with the warships?

 

[jimbob]

Meanwhile it looks like Russia is getting mothballed T62s ready for service

https://twitter.com/John_A_Ridge/status/1528907750960414721?s=20&t=y9y0SsaB4MFUYlFud5v8HA

Which must come with logistical problems as the main gun is a smaller calibre.

John Ridge
@John_A_Ridge
3/19) This report leads to a damning implication. RU has potentially nearly exhausted its immediately operable reserves of T-64s, T-72s, T-80s, and T-90s. Frankly, there is absolutely no reason to deploy a T-62 if you have access to a more modern T-64, T-72, T-80, or T-90.
2:16 AM · May 24, 2022·Twitter for iPhone

 

[The Don]

Meanwhile it looks like Russia is getting mothballed T62s ready for service

https://twitter.com/John_A_Ridge/status/1528907750960414721?s=20&t=y9y0SsaB4MFUYlFud5v8HA

Which must come with logistical problems as the main gun is a smaller calibre.

You've got it all wrong jimbob, it's simply an indication of how fantastically well the Russian Army is doing.

They're simply making things more sporting by using a tank with a smaller gun - the military equivalent of bow-hunting or attempting to catch as big a fish as possible on as light a line

 

[The Great Zaganza]

The logic is that a Javelin is more expensive than a T-64s

 

[shemp]

Old war criminal who has lived far too long says that Ukraine must cede territory to Russia.

Henry Kissinger: Ukraine must give Russia territory

Go die in a dumpster fire, you decrepit old ghoul!

 

[ponderingturtle]

Would you let a fleet in to a port you were blockading?
What would be the point of the blockade?

Some nations might for humanitarian reasons I get that you never would though.

If they aren't going to stop humanitarian ships why bother with the warships?

Because it is easy to stop the humanitarian ships with a warship and then still not be at war with the west. But if they open fire on warships it is a different statement. Kind of like all those pointless tripwire forces that Nato puts in countries bordering Russia. Clearly they serve no purpose either right?

 

[The Great Zaganza]

Old war criminal who has lived far too long says that Ukraine must cede territory to Russia.

Henry Kissinger: Ukraine must give Russia territory

Go die in a dumpster fire, you decrepit old ghoul!

While Ukraine is at it, could it please convict this War Criminal, too?

 

[Jack by the hedge]

Some nations might for humanitarian reasons I get that you never would though.


Because it is easy to stop the humanitarian ships with a warship and then still not be at war with the west. But if they open fire on warships it is a different statement. Kind of like all those pointless tripwire forces that Nato puts in countries bordering Russia. Clearly they serve no purpose either right?

I think that tripwire is already in place and it's Russian. Are you imagining Western navies can just sail up to Sevastopol and blockade the Russian Black Sea fleet unmolested?

I gather the countries who really rely on Ukrainian (and Russian) grain exports are Middle Eastern. So I can just about imagine a country like Egypt, who have historic friendly relations with Russia, might persuade the Russians to allow safe passage for grain carriers for humanitarian reasons. Presumably the Russians would leverage as much benefit as possible for permitting it.

 

[shemp]

I guess gas prices are high enough now that a majority of Americans are ready to cut Ukraine loose.

Majority Of Americans Think Protecting Economy—Not Sanctioning Russia—Should Be Country’s Top Priority, Poll Finds

More than half of Americans now believe the country’s top priority should be staving off damage to the economy rather than punishing Russia for invading Ukraine, according to an Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research poll, as soaring costs and inflation amid the ongoing war prompt a reassessment of priorities.

A marginal majority of Americans—51%—believe the country’s top priority should be limiting damage to the U.S. economy rather than sanctioning Russia, according to the poll of 1,172 adults conducted between May 12 to May 16.

A significant minority—45%—of the adults polled think the nation’s biggest priority should be sanctioning Russia as effectively as possible for its invasion of Ukraine, even if it comes at the expense of the U.S. economy.

The figures—the reverse of April, when 51% supported the most effective sanctions and 45% supported limiting damage to the U.S. economy—underscore changing public sentiment towards sanctions as the war drags on and inflation soars.

"The price of tea has doubled!? Ah, let's just call off this revolution."

 

[crescent]

The logic is that a Javelin is more expensive than a T-64s

T-62s (based on T-55), not T-64s. The newest ones (production ceased in 1975) are not just older than the crews that will be operating them - they're older than most of the parents of the crews that will be operating them.

Quantity has quality all its own, Russia will just keep grinding down Ukrainian defenses. Easy for Russia to do when it takes pride it the tradition of taking casualties that would depopulate lesser nations. Those antique tanks will still take effort for the Ukrainians to destroy and will still manage to take a few Ukrainians with them.

Sadly, it works. Over the past few days Russia has stepped up its advances in Luhansk and might actually have a shot at finally encircling the Ukrainian forces there or forcing them to withdraw a large number of forces pretty far from where they are currently entrenched. This is something Russia has been claiming to have already accomplished since the first week of the war, something they have been churning out of their fiction writing workshops/news releases - but now they are actually making progress towards that goal.

 

[The Don]

Some nations might for humanitarian reasons I get that you never would though.

I'm not aware that Russia under Putin is renowned for its adherence to humanitarian causes.

 

[Vixen]

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...sm-not-totalitarianism-claims-moscow-diplomat

War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength. This might as well be Russia's official motto.

Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear! The UK has Nadine Dorries* as Culture Secretary** and Russia has this woman as its Foreign Press Secretary, who seems to know little to nothing about what she speaks of.

Maria Vladimirovna Zakharova viz a Animal Varm horror akadamivva, to make an anagram of her name.

*Widely known as an airhead
**An oxymoron